V' 


THE   WORKS 


JONATHAN^EDWARDS,  D.  D. 


LATE    PRESIDENT    OF    UNION    COLLEGE. 


MEMOIR  OF  HIS  LIFE  AND  CHARACTER, 


TRYON    EDWARDS 


IN  TWO  VOLUMES. 
VOL.  II. 


ANDOVER: 

PRINTED  AND  PUBLISHED  BY  ALLEN,  MORRILL  &  WARD  WELL. 
NEW  YORK  :    DAYTON  AND  NEWMAN. 

PHILADELPHIA  :    HENRY  PERKINS. BOSTON  :    CROCKER  AND  BREWSTER, 

GOULD,  KENDALL  AND  LINCOLN,  TAPPAN  AND  DENNET. 
HARTFORD :    TYLER  AND  PORTER. 

1842. 


Entered  according  to  act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1842,  by 

ALLEN,  MORRILL  AND   WARDWELL, 

in  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  Massachusetts. 


CONTENTS 

OF 

VOLUME  II. 
SERMON  I. 

ON  THE   ATONEMENT. 

Ephesians  1:  7. — In  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood, 
the  forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  grace.     .  page  11 

SERMON  11. 
On  the  same  subject.  ........         23 

SERMON  III. 
On  the  same  subject.         ........         38 

SERMON  IV. 

THE  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH,  THE  END  OF  PREACHING. 

2  Corinthians  4:  2. — But  have  renounced  the  hidden  things  of  dis- 
honesty, not  walking  in  craftiness,  nor  handling  the  word  of  God 
deceitfully  ;  but  by  manifestation  of  the  truth,  commending  our- 
selves to  every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God.         .         .         53 

SERMON  V. 

THE   INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF   THE    9LAVE   TRADE, 
AND   OF    SLAVERY. 

Matthew  7: 12.  —  Therefore  all  thhigs  whatsoever  ye  would  that 
men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them  :  for  this  is  the  law 
and  the  projihets.  ........         75 

SERMON  VI. 

ALL  DIVINE   TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

Acts  20:  20. — And  how  I  kept  back  nothing  that  was  profitable 
unto  you. 98 


IV  CONTENTS. 

SERMON  VII. 

MARRIAGE   OF  A    WIFe's   SISTER  CONSIDERED. 

Leviticus  18:  10.' — TJi on  shall  not  uncover  the  nakedness  of  thy  bro- 
ther's wife  :  it  is  thy  brother's  nakedness.  ....       124 

SERMON  VIII. 
faith  and  a  good  conscience  illustrated. 

1  Timothy  1:  19. — Holding  faith  and  a  good  conscience.         .         .       142 

SERMON  IX. 

DEPRAVITY   THE   SOURCE   OF   INFIDELITY. 

John  7:  17. — If  any  man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  doc- 
trine, whether  it  be  of  God,  or  whether  I  speak  of  myself.  .       161 

SERMON  X. 

GOD  A  REFUGE   AND  HELP. 

PsALM  46:  1. — God  is  our  refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present  help  in 
trouble.  ..........       173 

SERMON  XI. 

the  belief   of   CHRISTIANITY  NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY. 

Psalm  144:  15. — Yea,  happy  is  that  people  whose  God  is  the  Lord.        185 

SERMON  Xn. 

the  duty  of  ministers  TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH. 

John  18:  37. — To  this  end  was  I  born,  and  for  this  cause  came  I  into 
the  world,  that  I  should  bear  witness  unto  the  truth.         .         .         210 

SERMON  XIIL 

THE  minister's   PARTING  COUNSEL. 

2  Corinthians  13:  2. — Finally,  brethren,  farewell :  Be  perfect,  be  of 

good  comfort,  be  of  one  mind,  live  in  peace ;  and  the  God  of  love 
and  peace  shall  be  with  you.  ......         224 

SERMON  XIV. 

submission  to  RULERS. 

Romans  13:  1,  2. — Let  every  soul  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers. 
For  there  is  no  power  but  of  God :  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained 


CONTENTS.  V 

of  God.     AVliosoever  therefore  resisteth  the  power,  resisteth  the 
ordinance  of  God.         ........         238 

SERMON  XV. 

MERE  REPENTANCE  NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON. 

Acts  3:  19. — Repent  therefore,  and  be  converted,  that  your  sins  may 
be  blotted  out 248 

SERMON  XVL 

CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

1  Corinthians  1:  30. — Of  him  are  ye  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  of  God  is 
made  unto  us, — righteousness.         ......         258 

SERMON  XVn. 

CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

1  Corinthians  1:  23. — But  we  preach  Christ  crucified,  unto  the  Jews 

a  stumbling-block,  and  unto  the  Greeks  foolishness.         .         .         274 

SERMON  XVnL 

HOLDING  fast  OUR  PROFESSION. 

Hebrews  4: 14. — Seeing  then  we  have  a  great  high  priest,  that  is 
passed  into  the  heavens,  Jesus,  the  Son  of  God,  let  us  hold  fast  our 
profession.  .         .  .  .  .         .         .  .         .  .         291 

SERMON  XIX. 

THE   soul's  immortality,  AND   FUTURE   RETRIBUTION. 

2  Timothy  1:  10. — Who  hath  abolished  death,  and  hath  brought  life 

and  immortality  to  light  through  the  gospel.   ....         302 

SERMON  XX. 

FALSE   REFUGES   UNSAFE. 

Isaiah  28:  17. — And  the  hail  shall  sweep  away  the  refuge  of  lies,  and 
the  waters  shall  ovei-flow  the  hiding-place.      ....         323 

SERMON  XXI. 

the  parting  commendation. 

Acts  20:  32. — And  now,  brethren,  I  commend  you  to  God  and  to  the 
word  of  his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  you  up  and  to  give  you  an 
inheritance  among  all  them  which  are  sanctified.    . 


VI  CONTENTS. 

SERMON  XXn. 

GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF  ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS  AND  ACTIONS. 

Philippians  2: 13. — It  is  God  which  worketh  in  you  hoth  to  will  and 
to  do  of  his  good  pleasure.    .......         348 

SERMON  XXin. 

THE  LAW  NOT  MADE   VOID   THROUGH  FAITH. 

Romans  3:  31. — Do  we  then  make  void  the  law  through  faith  ?  God 
forbid :  yea,  we  establish  the  law.  .....         361 

SERMON  XXIV. 

THE  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY  OF  THE  ELECT. 

Romans  8: 33. — Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?  378 
SERMON  XXV. 

GRACE   EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 

Matthew  5:  15. — ^Neither  do  men  light  a  candle,  and  put  it  under  a 
bushel,  but  on  a  candlestick  ;  and  it  giveth  light  unto  all  that  are 
in  the  house 387 

SERMON  XXVL 

THE   GLORY  OF    THE   GOSPEL, 

1  Timothy  1:  11. — The  glorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God.  .         401 

SERMON  XXVn. 

THE  BROAD   WAY. 

Matthew  7:  13. — Enter  ye  in  at  the  strait  gate ;  for  wide  is  the  gate 
and  broad  is  the  way  that  leadeth  to  destruction,  and  many  there 
be  which  go  in  thereat.         .         .         .  .  .         .  .         412 

SERMON  XXVm. 

universal   salvation  inconsistent   with   salvation  by  CHRIST. 

1  Timothy  1:  15. — This  is  a  faitliful  saying,  and  worthy  of  all  accep- 
tation, that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  save  suiners.    ,         428 

SERMON  XXIX. 

CHARITY  THE   VEIL   OF    SINS. 

1  Peter  4:  8. — And  above  all  things  have  fervent  charity  among  your- 
selves ;  for  charity  shall  cover  the  multitude  of  sins.        .         .         447 


CONTENTS.  VII 

ARTICLES  FROM  THE  THEOLOGICAL  MAGAZINE. 

Merit  of  Virtue  and  Demerit  of  Sin.  .....  459 

Modern  Liberality 464 

Tlie  Divine  Vengeance.    ........  465 

i  The  Salvation  of  the  Heathen. 465 

Benevolence  of  God  in  inflicting  Punishment.     ....  466 

Promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit.       .......  468 

The  Proof  of  the  Moral  Perfections  of  God,  from  the  Light  of  Nature.  471 

Immateriality  of  the  human  Soul.       .  .  .  .  .         .  497     y, 

'^  Free  Agency  and  absolute  Decree  reconciled.     ....  502 

The  Proof  of  God's  moral  Perfections,  from  Scripture.  .  .  505 

)t  The  Doctrine  of  Election 508 

^    On  moral  Agency.  .  .  .         .         .  .         .  •  •  512 

Deistic  Objections,  with  Answers.      ......  518 

'    Of  Sinning  not  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  Transgression.        .  526 

The  Soul  in  the  intermediate  State.  ......  528 

Short  Comments  on  new  Texts.         ......  533 

■^   What  is  the  Foundation  of  moral  obligation  ?      .  .         .  .  538 

Concerning  the  Warrant  of  the  Sinner  to  believe  in  Christ.  .  541 

Of  Self-Love 544 

LvDEx 549 


V 


SERMONS. 


'*Wr 


PHiX^UiUU'OH   '^ 


THREE  SERMONS 


NECESSITY  OF    THE  ATONEMENT, 


AND  ITS  CONSISTENCY  WITH 


FREE  GRACE  IN  FORGIVENESS.* 


SERMON    1. 

Ephesians  1 :  7. — In  whom  ive  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the.  forgive'- 
ness  of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  grace. 

The  doctrine  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins  is  a  capital  doctrine  of 
the  gospel.  As  it  is  much  insisted  on' by  the  other  writers  of  the 
New  Testament ;  so  it  is  above  all,  by  the  author  of  this  epistle. 
In  our  text,  he  asserts  that  we  are  forgiven  according  to  the 
riches  of  grace  ;  not  merely  in  the  exercise  of  grace,  as  the  very 
term  forgiveness  implies,  but  in  the  exercise  of  the  riches  of 
grace  ;  importing  that  forgiveness  is  an  act  of  the  most  free  and 
abundant  grace.  Yet  he  also  asserts  that  this  gratuitous  for- 
giveness is  in  consequence  of  a  redemption  by  the  blood  of 
Christ.  But  how  are  these  two  parts  of  the  proposition  consis- 
tent ?  If  we  be  in  the  literal  sense  forgiven  in  consequence  of  a 
redemption,  we  are  forgiven  on  account  of  the  price  of  redemp- 
tion previously  paid.  How  then  can  we  be  truly  said  to  he  for- 
given ;  a  word  which  implies  the  exercise  of  grace  7  and  espe- 
cially how  can  we  be  said  to  be  forgiven  according  to  the  riches 
of  grace  ?  This  is  at  least  a  seeming  inconsistence.  If  our  for- 
giveness be  purchased,  and  the  price  of  it  be  already  paid,  it 
seems  to  be  a  matter  of  debt,  and  not  of  grace.     By  this  difficul- 

*  Preached  before  His  Excellency  the  Governor,  and  a  large  number  of 
both  Houses  of  the  Legislature  of  tlie  State  of  Connecticut,  during  their 
sessions  at  New  Haven,  in  October,  1785,  and  published  by  request. 


12  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

ty  some  have  been  induced  to  reject  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  re- 
demption, satisfaction,  or  atonement.  Others,  who  have  not 
been  driven  to  that  extremity  by  this  difficulty,  yet  have  been 
exceedingly  perplexed  and  embarrassed.  Of  these  last,  I  freely 
confess  myself  to  have  been  one.  Having  from  my  youth  devo- 
ted myself  to  the  study  of  theoretic  and  practical  theology,  I  have 
regarded  this  as  one  of  the  gordian  knots  in  that  science.  How 
far  what  shall  now  be  oflered  towards  a  solution,  ought  to  aftbrd 
satisfaction,  is  submitted  to  the  judgment  of  my  candid  auditors. 

Our  text  naturally  suggests  these  three  inquiries : 

Are  sinners  forgiven  tiirough  the  redemption  or  atonement  of 
Jesus  Christ  only  ? — What  is  the  reason  or  ground  of  this  mode 
of  forgiveness  ? — Is  this  mode  of  forgiveness  consistent  with  grace, 
or  according  to  the  riches  of  grace  ?  Let  us  consider  these  in 
their  order. 

I.  Are  ice  forgiven  through  the  redemption  or  atonement  of 
Jesus  Christ  only  1 

I  say  redemption  or  atonement,  because,  in  my  view,  they 
mutually  imply  each  other.  That  we  ai'e  forgiven  through  the 
atonement  of  Christ — and  can  be  forgiven  m.no  other  w^ay,  the 
scriptures  very  clearly  teach.  For  evidence  as  to  the  first  of 
these  particulars,  I  appeal  to  the  following  passages  of  scripture, 
which  are  indeed  but  a  few  of  the  many  which  exhibit  the  same 
truth.  First,  our  text  itself:  "In  whom  we  have  redemption 
through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  according  to  the  riches 
of  his  grace."  Romans  3  :  -24,  "  Being  justified  freely  by  his 
grace,  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Jesus  Christ."  Acts 
20:  28,  '•  To  feed  the  church  of  God,  which  he  hath  purchased 
with  his  own  blood."  Hebrews  9:  1 2,  '•  By  his  own  blood  he  en- 
tered in  once  into  the  holy  place,  having  obtained  eternal  redemp- 
tion for  us."  1  Peter  1:  18,  "Forasmuch  as  ye  know,  that  ye 
were  not  redeemed  with  corruptible  things,  as  silver  and  gold, 
but  with  the  precious  blood  of  Christ,  as  of  a  lamb  without  blem- 
ish and  without  spot."  Ibid.  2:  24,  "  Who  his  ownself  bare  our 
sins,  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,  that  we  being  dead  to  sin, 
should  live  unto  righteousness :  by  whose  stripes  ye  were  heal- 
ed." Isa.  53:  4,  5,  6,  '•  He  hath  borne  our  griefs,  and  cairied 
our  sorrows — He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  he  was 
bruised  for  our  iniquities,  the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  up- 
on him,  and  with  his  stripes  we  are  healed.  The  Lord  hath  laid 
on  him  the  iniquity  of  us  all."  Ibid.  v.  10, 11,  12,  "  Yet  it  plea- 
sed the  Lord  to  bruise  him  ;  he  hath  put  him  to  grief; — when 
thou  shalt  make  his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed 
— He  shall  bear  their  iniquities. — And  he  bare  the  sins  of  many." 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  13 

The  scriptures  also  teach  the  absolute  necessity  of  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ,  and  that  we  can  obtain  forgiveness  and  salvation 
through  that  only.  The  sacrifices  appointed  to  be  made  by  the 
ancient  Israelites,  seem  evidently  to  point  to  Christ ;  and  to  show 
the  necessity  of  the  vicarious  sacrifice  of  him,  who  is  therefore 
said  to  be  "  our  passover  sacrificed  for  us  ;"  and  to  have  "  given 
himself  for  us,  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God,  for  a  sweet 
smelling  savor  ;"  and  '*  now  once  in  the  end  of  the  world,  to  have 
appeared,  to  put  away  sin,  by  the  sacrifice  of  himself."  1  Cor. 
5:  7.  Eph.  5:  2.  Heb.  9:  26.  As  the  ancient  Israelites  could 
obtain  pardon  in  no  other  way  than  by  those  sacrifices ;  this 
teaches  us  that  we  can  obtain  it  only  by  the  sacrifice  of  Christ. 

Tiie  positive  declarations  of  the  New  Testament  teach  the  same 
truth  still  more  directly — as  Luke  24:  25,  26,  '•'  O  fools,  and  slow 
of  heart  to  believe  all  that  the  prophets  have  spoken  !  Ought 
not  Christ  to  have  suffered  these  things,  and  to  enter  into  his 
glory  ?"  Verse  46,  ''  Thus  it  behoved  Christ  to  suffer,  and  to  rise 
from  the  dead  the  third  day."  Rom.  3:  25,  26,  "  Whom  God 
hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood,  to 
declare  his  righteousness — that  he  might  be  just,  and  the  justi- 
fier  of  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus."  It  seems  that  God  could 
not  have  been  just  in  justifying  the  believer,  had  not  Christ  been 
made  a  propitiation.  John  3:  14,  15,  '"As  Moses  lifted  up  the 
serpent  in  the  wilderness,  so  must  the  son  of  man  be  lifted  up." 
Heb.  9;  22,  '•'  Without  shedding  of  blood  is  no  remission."  1  Cor. 
3:  11,  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay,  than  that  is  laid,  which 
is  Jesus  Christ."  Acts  4:  12,  "  Neither  is  there  salvation  in  any 
other :  for  there  is  none  other  name  under  heaven  given  among 
men,  whereby  we  must  be  saved." 

The  necessity  of  the  death  and  atonement  of  Christ  sufficient- 
ly appears  by  the  bare  event  of  his  death.  If  his  death  were  not 
necessary,  he  died  in  vain.  But  we  cannot  suppose  that  either  he 
or  his  father  would  have  consented  to  his  death,  had  it  not  been 
absolutely  necessary.  Even  a  man  of  common  wisdom  and  good- 
ness, would  not  consent  either  to  his  own  death  or  that  of  his  son, 
but  in  a  case  of  necessity,  and  in  order  to  some  important  and  val- 
uable end.  Much  less  can  we  suppose,  that  either  Christ  Jesus 
the  Son  would  have  consented  to  his  own  death,  or  that  the  infi- 
nitely wise  and  good  feather  would  have  consented  to  the  death 
of  his  only  begotten  ahd  dearly  beloved  son,  in  whom  his  soul 
was  well  pleased,  and  who  was  full  of  grace  and  truth,  the  bright- 
ness of  his  own  glory  and  the  express  image  of  his  person,  the 
chiefest  among  ten  thousand  and  altogether  lovely,  if  there  had 
not  been  the  most  urgent  necessity.     Especially  as  this  most  ex- 

2* 


14  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

cellent  son  so  earnestly  prayed  to  the  father,  to  exempt  him  from 
death  ;  Matt.  20:  39,  "O  my  father,  if  it  be  possible,  let  this  cup 
pass  from  me  !  Nevertheless  not  as  I  will,  but  as  thou  wilt."  The 
son  himself  hath  told  us,  John  11:  42,  "  That  the  father  heareth 
him  always ;"  and  therefore  we  may  be  sure,  that  if  the  condi- 
tion of  his  pathetic  petition  had  taken  place  ;  if  it  had  been  pos- 
sible, that  the  designs  of  God  in  the  salvation  of  sinners  should 
be  accomplished,  without  the  death  of  Christ,  his  prayer,  in  this 
instance,  would  have  been  answered,  and  he  would  have  been  ex- 
empted from  death.  And  since  he  was  not  exempted,  we  have 
clear  evidence,  that  his  death  was  a  matter  of  absolute  necessity. 

The  necessity  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  is  clearly  taught  also 
by  the  apostle.  Gal.  2:  21,  "  If  righteousness  come  by  law,  then 
Christ  is  dead  in  vain."  It  is  to  no  purpose  to  pretend  that  the 
law,  in  this  passage,  means  the  ceremonial  law  ;  because  he  tells 
us,  chap.  3:  21,  "  That  if  there  had  been  a  law  given,  which  could 
have  given  life,  verily  righteousness  should  have  been  by  the  law." 
But  the  moral  law  was  a  law  which  had  been  given,  and  since  no 
law  which  had  been  given  could  give  life,  it  follows,  that  forgive- 
ness and  life  could  not  be  by  the  moral  law,  any  more  than  by 
the  ceremonial,  and  that  if  they  could,  Christ  is  dead  in  vain. 

II.  Our  next  inquiry  is,  what  is  the  reason  or  ground  of  this 
mode  of  forgiveness?  or  why  is  an  atonement  necessary  in  or- 
der to  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  ? 

I  answer,  it  is  necessary  on  the  same  ground  and  for  the  same 
{reasons,  as  punishment  would  have  been  necessary,  if  there  had 
•been  no  atonement  made.      The  ground  of  both  is  the  same. 
The  question  then  comes  to  this :  why  would  it  have  been  ne- 
cessary, if  no  atonement  had  been  made,  that  punishment  should 
be  inflicted  on  the  transgressors  of  the  divine  law  ?     This,  I  sup- 
/  pose,  would  have  been  necessary,  to  maintain  the  authority  of 
I  the  divine  law.     If  that  be  not  maintained,  but  the  law  fall  into 
contempt,  the  contempt  will  fall  equally  on  the  legislator  himself; 
his  authority  will  be  despised,  and  his  government  weakened. 
And  as  the  contempt  shall  increase,  which  may  be  expected  to 
increase,  in  proportion  to  the  neglect  of  executing  the  law  ;  the 
divine  government  will  approach  nearer  and  nearer  to  a  dissolu- 
tion, till  at  length  it  will  be  totally  annihilated. 

But  when  moral  creatures  are  brought  into  existence,  there 
must  be  a  moral  government.  It  cannot  be  reconciled  with  the 
wisdom  and  goodness  of  God  to  make  intelligent  creatures  and 
leave  them  at  random,  without  moral  law  and  government.  That 
there  must  be  a  moral  government,  is  the  dictate  of  reason  from 
the  nature  of  things.     Besides  the  nature  of  things,-we  have  in 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  15 

the  present  instance /acf,  to  assist  our  reasoning.  God  hath  in 
fact  given  a  moral  law  and  established  a  moral  government  over 
his  intelligent  creatures.  So  that  we  have  clear  proof,  that  infi- 
nite wisdom  and  goodness  judged  it  to  be  necessary,  to  put  intel- 
ligent creatures  under  moral  law  and  government.  But  in  order 
to  a  moral  law,  there  must  be  a  penalty ;  otherwise  it  would 
be  mere  advice,  but  no  law.  In  order  to  support  the  authority 
and  vigor  of  this  law,  the  penalty  must  be  inflicted  on  transgres- 
sors. If  a  penalty  be  denounced  indeed,  but  never  inflicted  ;  the 
law  becomes  no  law,  as  really  as  if  no  penalty  had  been  annexed 
to  it.  As  well  might  no  law  have  been  made  or  published,  as  a 
law  have  been  published,  with  the  most  awful  penalties,  and  these 
never  be  inflicted.  Nay,  in  some  respects  it  would  be  much  bet- 
ter and  more  reconcilable  with  the  divine  perfections.  It  would 
be  more  consistent,  and  show  that  the  legislator  was  not  ignorant, 
either  of  his  own  want  of  power  to  carry  a  law  into  eflfect,  or  of 
the  rights  of  his  subjects,  or  of  the  boundaries  between  right  and 
wrong.  But  to  enact  a  law  and  not  execute  it,  implies  a  weak- 
ness of  some  kind  or  other ;  either  an  error  of  judgment,  or  a 
consciousness  of  a  depraved  design  in  making  the  law,  or  a  want 
of  power  to  carry  it  into  effect,  or  some  other  defect.  Therefore 
such  a  proceeding  as  this  is  dishonorable  and  contemptible ;  and 
by  it,  both  the  law  and  legislator  not  only  appear  in  a  contempti- 
ble light,  but  Ideally  ore  contemptible. 

Hence,  to  execute  the  threatening  of  the  divine  law,  is  neces- 
sary to  preserve  the  dignity  and  authority  of  the  law,  and  of  the 
author  of  it,  and  to  the  very  existence  of  the  divine  moral  gov- 
ernment. It  is  no  impeachment  of  the  divine  power  and  wisdom, 
to  say,  that  it  is  impossible  for  God  himself  to  uphold  his  moral 
government,  over  intelligent  creatures,  when  once  his  law  hath 
fallen  into  contempt.  He  may  indeed  govern  them  by  irresisti- 
ble force,  as  he  governs  the  material  world ;  but  he  cannot  gov- 
ern them  by  law,  by  rewards  and  punishments. 

If  God  maintain  the  authority  of  his  law,  by  the  infliction  of 
the  penalty,  it  will  appear,  that  he  acts  consistently  in  the  legis- 
lative and  executive  parts  of  his  government.  But  if  he  were 
not  to  inflict  the  penalty,  he  would  act  and  appear  to  act,  an  in- 
consistent part,  or  to  be  inconsistent  with  himself.  If  the  author- 
ity of  the  divine  law  be  supported  by  the  punishment  of  trans- 
gressors, it  will  most  powerfully  tend  to  restrain  all  intelligent 
creatures  from  sin.  But  if  the  authority  of  the  law  be  not  sup- 
ported, it  will  rather  encourage  and  invite  to  sin,  than  restrain 
from  it. 

For  these  reasons,  which  are  indeed  all  implied  in  supporting 


16  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

the  dignity  and  authority  of  the  divine  law,  it  would  have  been 
necessary,  had  no  atonement  for  sin  been  made,  that  the  penalty 
of  the  law  be  inflicted  on  transgressors. 

If  in  this  view  of  the  matter,  it  should  be  said.  Though  for  the 
reasons  before  mentioned,  it  is  necessary  that  the  penalty  of  the 
law,  in  many  instances,  or  in  most  instances,  be  inflicted ;  yet 
why  is  it  necessary,  that  it  should  be  inflicted  in  every  instance  ? 
Why  could  not  the  Deity,  in  a  sovereign  way,  have  forgiven  at 
least  some  sinners  without  any  atonement?  Why  could  not 
the  authority  of  the  law  have  been  sufficiently  supported,  without 
the  punishment  of  every  individual  transgressor  ?  We  find  that 
such  strictness  is  not  necessary  or  even  subservient  to  the  public 
good,  in  human  governments ;  and  why  is  it  necessary  in  the  di- 
vine ?  To  these  inquiries  I  answer,  by  other  inquiries.  Why, 
on  the  supposition  of  no  atonement,  would  it  have  been  neces- 
sary, that  the  penalty  of  the  law  should  be  inflicted  in  any  in- 
stance ?  Why  could  not  the  Deity,  in  a  sovereign  way,  without 
any  atonement,  have  pardoned  all  mankind  ?  I  presume  it  will 
be  granted,  for  the  reasons  before  assigned,  that  such  a  proceed- 
ing as  this,  would  have  been  inconsistent  with  the  dignity  and 
authority  of  the  divine  law  and  government.  And  the  same  con- 
sequence in  a  degj'ee,  follows  from  every  instance  of  pardon  in 
this  mode.  It  is  true  the  ends  of  human  governments  are  tole- 
rably answered,  though  in  some  instances  the  guilty  are  suflfered 
to  pass  with  impunity.  But  as  imperfection  attends  all  human 
affairs ;  so  it  attends  human  governments  in  this  very  particular, 
that  there  are  reasons  of  state  which  require,  or  the  public  good 
requires,  that  gross  criminals,  be  in  some  instances,  dismissed 
with  impunity,  and  without  atonement.  Thus,  because  the  gov- 
ernment of  David  was  weak,  and  the  sons  of  Zeruiah  were  too 
hard  for  him,  Joab,  a  most  atrocious  murderer,  could  not,  dur- 
ing the  life  of  David,  be  brought  to  justice.  In  other  instances, 
atrocious  criminals  are  pardoned,  in  order  to  obtain  information 
against  others  still  more  atrocious,  and  dangerous  to  the  commu- 
nity. In  many  instances,  the  principals  only  in  certain  high 
crimes,  are  punished ;  the  rest  being  led  away  by  artifice  and 
misrepresentation,  are  not  supposed  to  deserve  punishment.  And 
it  is  presumed,  that  in  every  instance,  wherein  it  is  really  for  the 
good  of  the  community,  to  pardon  a  criminal,  without  proper  sat- 
isfaction for  his  crime,  it  is  because  of  either  some  weakness  in 
the  particular  state  of  the  government,  under  which  the  pardon 
is^ranted  ;  or  some  imperfection  in  the  laws  of  that  state,  so  that 
they  are  not  adapted  to  the  particular  case  ;  or  some  other  im- 
perfection such  as  is  apt  to  attend  all  human  aflfairs.     But  as  not 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  17 

any  of  these  is  supposable  in  the  divine  government,  there  is  no 
arguing  conclusively,  from  pardons  in  human  governments,  to 
pardons  in  the  divine. 

It  may  be  added,  that  in  every  instance  in  human  govern- 
ments, in  which  just  laws  are  not  strictly  executed,  the  govern- 
ment is  so  far  weakened  ;  and  the  character  of  the  rulers  either 
legislative  or  executive,  suffers,  either  in  point  of  ability  or  in 
point  of  integrity.  If  it  be  granted  that  the  law  is  just,  and  con- 
demns sin  to  no  greater  punishment  than  it  deserves,  and  if  God 
were  to  pardon  it  without  atonement,  it  would  seem  that  he  did 
not  hate  sin  in  every  instance,  nor  treat  it  as  being  what  it  really 
is,  infinitely  vile. 

For  these  reasons  it  appears  that  it  would  have  been  neces- 
sary, provided  no  atonement  had  been  made,  that  the  penalty  of 
the  law  should  have  been  inflicted,  even  in  every  instance  of  dis- 
obedience ;  and  for  the  same  reasons  doubtless  it  was  necessary, 
that  if  any  sinners  were  to  be  pardoned,  they  should  be  pardoned 
only  in  consequence  of  an  adequate  atonement.  The  atonement 
is  the  substitute  for  the  punishment  threatened  in  the  law  ;  and 
was  designed  to  answer  the  same  ends  of  supporting  the  author- 
ity of  the  law,  the  dignity  of  the  divine  moral  government,  and 
the  consistency  of  the  divine  conduct  in  legislation  and  execution. 
By  the  atonement  it  appears  that  God  is  determined  that  his  law 
shall  be  supported ;  that  it  shall  not  be  despised  or  transgressed 
with  impunity  ;  and  that  it  is  an  evil  and  a  bitter  thing  to  sin 
against  God. 

The  very  idea  of  an  atonement  or  satisfaction  for  sin,  is  some- 
thing which,  to  the  purposes  of  supporting  the  authority  of  the 
divine  law,  and  the  dignity  and  consistency  of  the  divine  govern- 
ment, is  equivalent  to  the  punishment  of  the  sinner,  according  to 
the  literal  threatening  of  the  law.  That  which  answers  these 
purposes  being  done,  whatever  it  be,  atonement  is  made,  and  the 
way  is  prepared  for  the  dispensation  of  pardon.  In  any  such 
case,  God  can  be  just  and  yet  thejustifier  of  the  sinner.  And 
that  that  which  is  sufficient  to  answer  these  purposes,  has  been 
done  for  us  according  to  the  gospel  plan,  I  presume  none  can 
deny,  who  believe,  that  the  eternal  "  word  was  made  flesh,  and 
dwelt  among  us,"  and  that  he  the  only  begotten  and  well  beloved 
son  of  God,  "  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,"  and 
'•  gave  himself  a  sacrifice  to  God  for  us." 

But  perhaps  some  who  may  readily  grant  that  what  Christ  hath 
done  and  suffered,  is  undoubtedly  sufficient  to  atone  for  the  sins 
of  his  people  ;  may  also  suppose  that  if  God  had  seen  fit  so  to  or- 
der it,  we  might  have  made  a  sufficient  atonement  for  our  own 


18  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

sins.  Or  whether  they  beheve  in  the  reahty  and  sufficiency  of 
the  atonement  of  Christ  or  not,  they  may  suppose  that  we  might 
have  atoned,  or  even  now  may  atone,  for  our  own  sins.  This 
hypothesis  therefore  demands  our  attention. 

If  we  could  have  atoned,  by  any  means,  for  our  own  sins,  it 
must  have  been  either  by  our  repentance  and  reformation,  or  by 
enduring  a  punishment,  less  in  degree  or  duration,  than  that 
which  is  threatened  in  the  law  as  the  wages  of  sin.  No  other  way 
for  us  to  atone  for  our  own  sins  appears  to  be  conceivable.  But  if 
we  attend  to  the  subject,  we  shall  find  that  we  can  make  no  pro- 
per atonement  in  either  of  these  ways. 

1.  We  could  not  make  atonement  for  our  sins  by  repentance 
and  reformation.  Repentance  and  reformation  are  a  mere  return 
to  our  duty,  which  we  ought  never  to  have  forsaken  or  intermit- 
ted. Suppose  a  soldier  deserts  the  service  into  which  he  is  en- 
listed, and  at  the  most  critical  period  not  only  forsakes  his  gen- 
eral and  the  cause  of  his  country,  but  joins  the  enemy  and  exerts 
himself  to  his  utmost  in  his  cause,  and  in  direct  opposition  to  that 
of  his  country  ;  yet  after  twelve  months  spent  in  this  manner,  he 
repents  and  returns  to  his  duty  and  his  former  service  ;  will  this 
repentance  and  reformation  atone  for  his  desertion  and  rebellion  ? 
Will  his  repentance  and  return,  without  punishment,  support  the 
authority  of  the  law  against  desertion  and  rebellion,  and  deter 
others  from  the  like  conduct  equally  as  the  punishment  of  the  de- 
linquent according  to  law  ?  It  cannot  be  pretended.  Such  a 
treatment  of  the  soldier  would  express  no  indignation  or  displea- 
sure of  the  general  at  the  conduct  of  that  soldier ;  it  would  by  no 
means  convince  the  army  or  the  world,  that  it  was  a  most  heinous 
crime  to  desert  and  join  the  standard  of  the  enemy.  Just  so  in 
the  case  under  consideration.  The  language  of  forgiving  sinners 
barely  on  their  repentance  is,  that  he  who  sins  shall  repent ;  that 
the  curse  of  the  law  is  repentance  ;  that  he  who  repents  shall  suf- 
fer, and  that  because  he  deserves  no  further  punishment.  But 
this  would  be  so  far  from  an  effectual  tendency  to  discourage  and 
restrain  from  sin,  that  it  would  greatly  encourage  to  the  commis- 
sion and  indulgence  of  it ;  as  all  that  sinners  would  have  to  fear, 
on  this  supposition,  would  be  not  the  wrath  of  God,  nor  anything 
terrible,  but  repentance,  the  greatest  blessing  to  which  any  man 
in  this  life  can  attain.  If  this  were  the  condition  of  forgiving 
sinners,  not  only  no  measures  would  be  taken  to  support  the  di- 
vine law,  but  none  to  vindicate  the  character  of  God  himself,  or 
to  show  that  he  acts  a  consistent  part,  and  agreeably  to  his  own 
law  ;  or  that  he  is  a  friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice.  On 
the  other  hand,  he  would  rather  appear  as  a  friend  to  sin  and 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  19 

vice,  or  indifferent  concerning  them.  What  would  you  think  of 
a  prince  who  in  a  law  against  murder,  should  threaten  it  with  a 
punishment  properly  severe ;  yet  should  declare  that  none  guilty 
of  that  crime  and  repenting  should  be  punished  ?  or  if  he  did  not 
positively  declare  this,  yet  should  in  fact  suffer  all  murderers  who 
repented  of  their  murders,  to  pass  with  impunity  ?  Undoubtedly 
you  would  conclude  that  he  was  either  a  very  weak  or  a  very 
wicked  prince  ;  either  that  he  was  unable  to  protect  his  subjects, 
or  that  he  had  no  real  regard  to  their  lives  or  safety,  whether  in 
their  individual  or  collective  capacity. 

2.  Neither  could  we  make  atonement  by  any  sufferings  short 
oi  the  full  punishment  of  sin.  Because  the  very  idea  of  atone- 
ment is  something  done,  which  to  the  purpose  of  supporting  the 
authority  of  the  law,  the  dignity  and  consistency  of  divine  gov- 
ernment and  conduct,  is  fully  equivalent  to  the  curse  of  the  law, 
and  on  the  ground  of  which,  the  sinner  may  be  saved  from  that 
curse.  But  no  sufferings  endured  by  the  sinner  himself,  short 
of  the  curse  of  the  law,  can  be  to  these  purposes  equivalent  to 
that  curse  ;  any  more  than  a  less  number  or  quantity  can  be 
equal  to  a  greater.  Indeed  a  less  degree  or  duration  of  suffering 
endured  by  Christ  the  Son  of  God,  may,  on  account  of  the  in- 
finite dignity  and  glory  of  his  person,  be  an  equivalent  to  the 
curse  of  the  law  endured  by  the  sinner ;  as  it  would  be  a  far 
more  striking  demonstration  of  a  king's  displeasure,  to  inflict,  in 
an  ignominious  manner,  on  the  body  of  his  own  son,  forty  stripes 
save  one  ;  than  to  punish  some  obscure  subject  with  death.  But 
when  the  person  is  the  same,  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  a  less 
degree  or  duration  of  pain  can  be  equal  to  a  greater,  or  can 
equally  strike  terror  into  the  minds  of  spectators,  and  make  them 
fear  and  no  more  do  any  such  wickedness. 

Besides  ;  if  a  less  degree  or  duration  of  punishment,  inflicted 
on  the  sinner,  would  answer  all  the  purposes  of  supporting  the 
authority  of  the  divine  law,  etc.  equally  as  that  punishment  which 
is  threatened  in  the  law  ;  it  follows  that  the  punishment  which  is 
threatened  in  the  law  is  too  great,  is  unjust,  is  cruel  and  oppres- 
sive ;  which  cannot  be  as  long  as  God  is  a  just  being. 

Thus  it  clearly  appears,  that  we  could  never  have  atoned  for 
our  own  sins.  If  therefore  atonement  be  made  at  all,  it  must  be 
made  by  some  other  person  ;  and  since  as  we  before  argued, 
Christ  the  son  of  God  hath  been  appointed  to  this  work,  we  may 
be  sure,  that  it  could  be  done  by  no  other  person  of  inferior  dig- 
nity. 

It  may  be  inquired  of  those  who  deny  the  necessity  of  the 
atonement  of  Christ,  whether  the  mission,  work  and  death  of 


20  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

Christ  were  at  all  necessary  in  order  to  the  salvation  of  sinners. 
If  they  grant  that  they  were  necessary,  as  they  exhibit  the  strong- 
est motives  to  repentance  ;  I  ask  farther,  could  not  God  by  any 
revelation  or  motives  otherwise,  whether  externally  or  internally, 
exhibited,  lead  sinners  to  repentance  ?  We  find  he  did  in  fact, 
without  the  mission,  work  and  death  of  Christ,  lead  the  saints  of 
the  Old  Testament  to  repentance.  And  doubtless  in  the  same 
way,  he  might  have  produced  the  same  effect,  on  men  of  modern 
times.  Why  then  doth  the  Scripture  say,  "  Other  foundation 
can  no  man  lay,  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ ;"  and, 
"  neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other  ?"  If  it  be  said  that 
these  texts  are  true,  as  God  hath  seen  fit  to  adopt  and  establish 
this  mode  of  salvation  ;  it  occurs  at  once,  that  then  it  may  with 
equal  truth  be  said,  concerning  those  who  were  converted  by  the 
preaching  of  Paul ;  other  foundation  could  no  man  lay,  for  their 
salvation,  than  the  apostle  Paul.  In  this  sense  too  every  event 
which  ever  takes  place,  is  equally  necessary  as  the  mission  and 
death  of  Christ ;  and  it  was  in  no  other  sense  necessary,  that 
Christ  should  be  sent  and  die,  than  that  a  sparrow  should  fall, 
or  not  fall,  to  the  ground.  In  short  to  say,  that  the  mission  and 
death  of  Christ  were  necessary,  because  God  had  made  this  con- 
stitution, is  to  resolve  all  into  the  sovereignty  of  God,  and  to  con- 
fess that  no  reason  of  Christ's  mission  and  death  is  assignable. 

Besides,  if  the  mission,  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ,  and 
the  knowledge  of  them,  be,  by  divine  constitution,  made  neces- 
sary to  the  salvation  of  sinners  ;  this  will  seem  to  be  wholly  in- 
consistent with  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  system  of  those 
who  deny  the  atonement  of  Christ ;  I  mean  the  principle,  that  it 
is  not  reconcilable  with  the  perfections  of  God,  to  refuse  a  par- 
don to  any  who  repent.  If  bare  repentance  and  reformation,  be 
the  ground  of  pardon,  doubtless  all  who  repent,  though  ever  so 
ignorant  of  Christ,  his  death  and  resurrection,  and  of  the  motives 
to  repentance  therein  exhibited,  are  entitled  to  pardon  ;  and  if 
so,  in  what  sense  will  the  Socinians  say,  the  mission  and  death 
of  Christ  are  necessary  to  pardon  ?  Not  surely  as  purchasing 
salvation  for  even  those  who  are  ignorant  of  them  ; — this  is  ab- 
horrent to  their  whole  system.  Not  as  exhibiting  the  strongest 
motives  to  repentance  ;  because  in  the  case  now  supposed,  these 
motives  are  perfectly  unknown.  And  they  will  not  say,  it  is  im- 
possible for  any  to  repent  who  are  ignorant  of  Christ.* 

*  "  It  is  certainlj'  the  doctrine  of  reason,  as  well  as  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment, that  God  is  merciful  to  the  penitent,  and  nothing  is  requisite  to  make 
men,  in  all  situatioiis,  the  objects  of  his  favor,  but  such  moral  conduct  as  he 
has  made  them  capable  of." — Priestly' s  Corruptions  of  Christianity,  Vol.  I. 
p.  27a 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  21 

Again,  how  is  it  more  consistent  with  the  divine  perfections, 
to  confine  pardon  and  salvation  to  the  narrow  Umits  of  those  who 
know  and  are  influenced  by  tlie  motives  to  repentance,  imphed 
in  the  death  and  resurrection  of  Christ ;  than  to  the  Umits  of 
those  who  repent  and  depend  on  the  atonement  of  Christ  ? 

It  may  be  further  inquired  of  those  gentlemen  mentioned  above, 
whether  the  pardon  of  the  penitent,  be  according  to  the  divine 
law,  or  according  to  the  gospel.  If  it  be  a  constitution  of  the 
law,  that  every  penitent  be  pardoned,  what  then  is  the  gospel  7 
And  wherein  does  the  grace  of  the  latter,  exceed  that  of  the 
former  ?  Besides,  is  it  not  strange,  to  suppose  that  bare  law 
knows  anything  of  repentance  and  of  the  promise  o(  pardon  on 
repentance  ?  Surely  such  a  law  must  be  a  very  gracious  law  ; 
and  a  very  gracious  lata  and  a  very  gracious  gospel  seem  to  be 
very  nearly  one  and  the  same  thing.  It  has  been  commonly  un- 
derstood that  the  divine  law  is  the  rule  of  justice.  If  so,  and  it 
be  a  provision  of  the  law,  that  every  penitent  be  acquitted  from 
punishment ;  then  surely  there  is  no  grace  at  all  in  the  acquittal 
of  the  penitent,  as  the  gentlemen  to  whom  I  now  refer  pretend, 
there  is  none  on  the  supposition  of  the  satisfaction  of  Christ. 
Again  ;  if  the  law  secure  impunity  to  all  penitents,  then  all  the 
terror  or  punishment  which  the  law  threatens,  is  either  repentance 
itself,  or  that  wise  and  wholesome  discipline  which  is  necessary 
to  lead  to  repentance  ;  these  are  the  true  and  utmost  curse  of  the 
law.  But  neither  of  these  is  any  curse  at  all ;  they  are  at  least 
among  the  greatest  blessings  which  can  be  bestowed  on  those 
who  need  them.  But  if  it  be  granted  that  the  bare  law  of  God 
does  not  secure  pardon  to  the  penitent,  but  admits  of  his  punish- 
ment, it  will  follow  that  the  punishment  of  the  penitent  would  be 
nothing  opposed  to  justice.  Surely  God  hath  not  made  an  un- 
just law.  It  also  follows,  that  to  punish  the  penitent  would  be 
not  at  all  inconsistent  with  the  divine  perfections  ;  unless  God 
hath  made  a  law,  which  cannot  with  respect  to  the  penitent,  or 
a  certain  part  of  his  subjects,  be  executed  consistently  with  his 
own  perfections.  And  if  the  punishment  of  the  penitent,  pro- 
vided no  atonement  had  been  made,  would  not  be  inconsistent 
with  justice,  or  with  the  perfections  of  God,  who  will  say,  that 
the  pardon  of  the  penitent,  on  the  sole  footing  of  an  atonement, 
is  inconsistent  with  either  ? 

If  neither  strict  justice,  nor  the  divine  law  founded  on  justice, 
nor  the  divine  perfections,  without  an  atonement,  secure  pardon 
to  all  who  repent,  what  will  become  of  the  boasted  argument  of 
the  Socinians,  against  the  atonement,  that  God  will  certainly  par- 
don and  save,  and  that  it  is  absurd  and  impious  to  suppose,  that 

Vol.  II.  3 


22  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

he  will  not  pardon  and  save,  all  who  repent  ?  Are  the  Socinians 
themselves  certain,  that  God  will  not  do  that  which  eternal  jus- 
tice, his  own  law,  and  his  own  perfections  allow  him  to  do  ? 
The  dilemma  is  this  :  eternal  justice  either  requires  that  every 
penitent  be  pardoned  in  consequence  of  his  repentance  merely, 
or  it  does  not.  If  it  do  require  this,*  it  follows,  that  pardon  is 
an  act  of  justice  and  not  of  grace;  therefore  let  the  Socinians 
be  forever  silent  on  this  head.  It  also  follows,  that  repentance 
answers,  satisfies,  fulfils,  the  divine  law,  so  that,  in  consequence 
of  it,  the  law  has  no  further  demand  on  the  sinner.  It  is  there- 
fore either  the  complete  righteousness  of  the  law,  or  the  complete 
curse  of  it ;  for  cursed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all 
things  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them.  It  also  follows, 
that  sin  is  no  moral  evil.  Doubtless  that  which  deserves  no  pun- 
ishment, or  token  of  the  divine  displeasure,  is  no  moral  evil. 
But  the  utmost  that  justice,  on  this  hypothesis,  requires  of  the 
sinner,  is  repentance,  which  is  no  token  of  the  divine  displeasure, 
but  an  inestimable  blessing.  It  also  follows,  that  as  eternal  jus- 
tice is  no  other  than  the  eternal  law  of  God,  grace  and  truth, 
life  and  immortality  came  and  were  brought  to  light  by  Moses, 
since  the  law  came  by  him  ;  that  the  law  contains  exceeding 
great  and  precious  promises,  which  promises,  however,  exceed- 
ing great  and  precious  as  they  are,  are  no  more  than  assurances, 
that  we  shall  not  be  injured.  It  follows  in  the  last  place  that 
justice  and  grace,  law  and  gospel,  are  perfectly  synonymous 
terms. 

Or  if  the  other  part  of  the  dilemma  be  taken,  that  eternal  jus- 
tice does  not  require,  that  every  penitent  be  pardoned ;  who 
knows  but  that  God  may  see  fit,  to  suffer  justice,  in  some  in- 
stances, to  take  place  ?  Who  will  say  that  the  other  divine  per- 
fections are  utterly  inconsistent  with  justice  ?  or  that  wisdom, 
goodness  and  justice  cannot  coexist  in  the  same  character  ?  or 
that  the  lawf  of  God  is  such  that  it  cannot  consistently  with  the 
divine  character,  be  executed  in  any  case  with  respect  to  the  peni- 
tent, or  with  others  any  further  than  is  needful  to  produce  re- 

*  If  the  penitent  may  not  be  punished,  then  the  impenitent  may  not 
be,  any  further  than  to  lead  them  to  repentance,  which  is  no  punisliment 
but  a  blessing.  But  it  is  granted,  on  the  present  supposition  that  the  law 
does  admit  of  punishment  which  is  not  disciplinary  and  conducive  to  the 
good  of  the  subject. 

f  That  law  in  which  Paul  delighted  after  the  inward  man ;  which  he 
declares  to  be  holy,  and  just,  and  good ;  to  be  glorious  too,  nay,  in  the  ab- 
stract, glory,  (Rom.  vii.  and  2  Cor.  iii.)  and  which  David  pronounces  to  be 
-perfect,  and  more  desirable  than  gold,  yea,  than  much  fine  gold ;  sweeter 
also  than  honey  and  the  honey  comb,  Ps.  xix. 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  23 

pentance,  which  is  indeed  no  execution  of  it  at  all.*  These 
would  be  bold  assertions  indeed  ;  let  him  who  avows  them,  at  the 
same  time  prove  them.  Indeed,  he  must  either  prove  these  as- 
sertions, or  own  that  justice  requires  the  pardon  of  every  penitent, 
and  abide  the  consequences ;  or  renounce  the  doctrine  that  the 
divine  perfections  require  that  every  penitent  be  pardoned,  with- 
out an  atonement.f 


SERMON    II 


Ephesians  1 :  7. — In  tchom,  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgive' 
ness  of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  grace. 

Having  in  the  preceding  discourse,  given  an  answer  to  the  two 
inquiries  proposed  concerning  the  necessity  and  the  ground  of 
the  necessity  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  I  proceed  to  the  third, 
which  is, 

III.  Are  we,  notwithstanding  the  redemption  of  Christ,  for- 
given freely  by  grace  1 

That  we  should  be  forgiven  wholly  through  the  redemption  of 
Christ,  and  yet  by  free  grace,  hath,  as  I  observed,  appeared  to 
many,  an  inconsistency,  or  a  perplexing  difficulty.  In  discours- 
ing on  this  question,  I  shall,  1.  Mention  several  attempts  which 
have  been  made  to  solve  this  difficulty.  2.  I  shall  suggest  some 
considerations  which  may  possibly  lead  to  the  true  solution. 

1.  I  am  to  mention  several  modes,  in  which  attempts  have 
been  made,  to  solve  this  difficulty. 

(1)  Some  allow  that  there  is  no  exercise  of  grace  in  the  bare 
pardon%  or  justification  of  the  sinner ;  that  all  the  grace  of  the 
gospel  consists  in  the  gift  of  Christ ;  in  providing  an  atonement ; 

*  The  law  knows  nothing  of  penitence.  Mere  disciplinary  punishment 
is  no  execution  of  law.  The  present  supposition  is,  that  the  law  does  ad- 
mit of  vindictive  punishment. 

t  "  Arguments  drawn  from  such  considerations  as  those  of  the  moral 
government  of  God,  the  nature  of  things,  and  the  general  plan  of  revela- 
tion, will  not  be  put  off  to  a  future  time.  The  whole  compass  and  force 
of  them  is  within  our  reach,  and  if  the  mind  be  imbiassed,  they  must,  I 
think,  determine  our  assent." — Con-uptions  of  Christianity,  Vol.  I.  p.  278. 

\  Tlie^impropriety  of  expression,  in  speaking  of  pardon  without  grace, 
would  neet^an  apology,  wei-e  it  not  common  in  treatises  on  this  subject. 
No  more  is^intended,  than  that^the  sinner  is  acquitted  or  released,  without 
grace. 


24  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

in  the  undertaking  of  Christ  to  make  atonement,  and  in  the  actual 
making  of  it.  And  as  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  is  founded  on 
those  gracious  actions ;  so  that,  in  a  more  lax  sense,  is  also  said 
to  be  an  act  of  grace.  As  to  this  account  of  the  matter,  I  have  to 
observe,  that  it  is  rather  yielding  to  the  objection,  than  answer- 
ing it.  It  is  allowed,  in  this  state  of  the  matter,  that  the  j)ardon 
of  the  sinner  is  properly  no  act  of  grace.  But  this  seems  not  to 
be  reconcilable  with  the  plain  declarations  of  scripture  ;  as  in  our 
text :  In  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the  for- 
giveness of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  grace.  Being 
justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redemption  that  is  in 
Jesus  Christ,  Rom.  3:  24.  These  and  such  like  passages  seem 
plainly  to  import,  that  pardon  itself  is  an  act  of  grace,  and  not 
merely  that  it  is  founded  on  other  acts,  which  are  acts  of  grace. 
Besides  the  very  idea  of  pardon  or  forgiveness  implies  grace.  So 
far  only  is  any  crime  pardoned,  as  it  is  pardoned  graciously. 
To  pardon  a  crime  on  the  footing  of  justice,  in  the  proper  sense 
of  the  wox6.  justice,  is  a  direct  contradiction. 

Again  ;  it  is  not  proper  to  say,  that  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  is 
an  act  of  grace,  merely  because  it  is  founded  on  the  gracious  gift 
of  Christ,  and  his  gracious  act  in  making  atonement.  It  is  not 
proper  to  say,  that  any  act  is  an  act  of  grace,  merely  because  it  is 
founded  on  another  act,  which  is  really  an  act  of  grace.  As 
well  we  may  say,  that  if  a  creditor,  by  a  third  person,  furnish  his 
debtor  with  money  sufficient  to  discharge  his  debt,  when  the 
debtor  has  in  this  way,  by  a  third  person,  paid  the  full  debt,  it  is 
an  act  of  grace  in  the  creditor  to  give  up  the  obligation.  Whereas, 
who  does  not  see  that  the  furnishing  of  the  money,  and  the  giv- 
ing up  of  the  obligation,  are  two  distinct  acts  ;  and  however  the 
former  is  indeed  an  act  of  grace ;  yet  the  latter  is  no  more  an 
act  of  grace,  than  if  the  money  had  been  paid  to  some  other 
creditor,  and  he  had  given  up  an  obligation  for  the  same  sum.  If 
it  be  an  act  of  grace  in  the  creditor,  to  deliver  up  an  obligation, 
for  which  he  hath  received  the  full  sum,  because  the  money  paid 
was  originally  furnished  by  himself,  then  it  would  be  consistent 
with  justice  in  the  creditor,  to  retain  the  obligation,  after  he  has 
received  the  full  sum  for  which  it  was  given ;  or  to  reject  the 
money,  and  cast  the  creditor  into  prison,  though  he  tenders  pay- 
ment. But  neither  of  these,  I  presume,  will  be  pretended  to  be 
just. 

(2)  Some  have  attempted  to  relieve  the  difficulty  now  under 
consideration,  in  this  manner:  They  say.  The  pardon  of  the  sin- 
ner is  no  act  of  grace  to  Christ,  because  he  has  paid  the  debt  for 
the  sinner ;  but  that  it  is  an  act  of  grace  to  the  sinner,  because 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  25 

the  debt  was  paid,  not  by  the  sinner  himself,  but  by  Christ.  Nor 
was  Christ  so  much  as  delegated  by  the  sinner  to  pay  his  debt. 
Concerning  this  I  observe,  in  the  Ji7'st  place,  That  if  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ  be  considered  as  the  payment  of  a  debt,  the  release 
of  the  sinner  seems  not  to  be  an  act  of  grace,  although  the  pay- 
ment be  made  by  Christ,  and  not  by  the  sinner  personally.  Sup- 
pose any  one  of  you,  my  auditors,  owes  a  certain  sum ;  and  he 
goes  and  pays  the  full  sum  himself  personally.  Doubtless  all  will 
agree,  that  the  creditor,  in  this  case,  when  he  gives  up  the  obli- 
gation, performs  a  mere  act  of  justice,  in  which  there  is  no  grace 
at  all.  But  in  what  respect  would  there  have  been  more  grace 
in  giving  up  the  obligation,  if  the  money  had  been  sent  by  a  ser- 
vant, by  a  friend,  or  by  any  third  person  ?  Here  I  am  sensible 
an  objection  will  arise  to  this  effect :  But  we  did  not  send  the 
payment  of  our  debt  to  God,  by  the  hand  of  Christ  as  our  friend  ; 
we  did  not  delegate  him  to  make  atonement  for  us ;  he  was  gra- 
ciously appointed  and  given  by  God.  To  this  I  answer.  That 
this  objection  places  the  whole  grace  of  the  gospel  in  providing 
the  Savior,  not  in  the  pardon  of  sin.  Besides,  if  by  delegating 
Christ,  be  meant  such  a  sincere  consent  and  earnest  desire,  that 
Christ  should  make  atonement  for  us,  as  a  man  may  have,  that 
his  friend  should  discharge  a  debt  in  his  behalf;  without  doubt 
every  true  christian,  in  this  sense,  delegates  Christ  to  make  atone- 
ment for  his  sins.  Did  not  Abraham  and  all  the  saints  who  lived 
before  the  incarnation  of  Christ,  and  who  were  informed  that 
atonement  was  to  be  made  for  them  by  Christ,  sincerely  consent 
to  it,  and  earnestly  desire  it  ?  And  though  now  Christ  has  actu- 
ally made  atonement,  yet  every  one  who  walks  in  the  steps  of 
the  faith  of  Abraham,  is  the  subject  of  the  like  sincere  consent  to 
the  office  and  work  of  Christ,  and  the  like  earnest  desire,  that  by 
his  atonement,  a  reconciliation  may  be  effected  between  God  and 
himself.  So  that  if  Christ  have,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  words, 
paid  the  debt  for  his  people,  his  people  do  as  truly  send  him  to 
make  this  payment,  as  a  man  ever  sends  his  friend  to  make  pay- 
ment to  his  creditor,  provided  still,  that  the  friend  furnishes  the 
money  to  be  paid. 

Nor  is  anything  wanting  to  make  any  man,  or  all  men,  in  this 
sense,  delegate  Christ  to  make  atonement  for  them,  but  the  gift 
of  repentance  or  a  new  heart.  And  if  God  had  not  prevented 
them  by  previously  appointing  Christ  to  the  work  of  redemption, 
all  mankind  being  brought  to  repentance,  and  being  informed  that 
Christ,  on  their  consent  and  delegation,  would  make  atonement 
for  their  sins,  would  freely  have  given  their  consent,  and  delega- 
ted him  to  the  work. 

3* 


26  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

But  what  if  the  people  of  Christ  did  not,  in  any  sense,  delegate 
him  to  this  work  ;  would  this  cause  the  payment  of  their  debt  by 
Christ,  to  be  at  all  more  consistent  with  free  grace  in  their  dis- 
charge ?  Suppose  a  man  without  any  delegation,  consent,  or 
knowledge  of  his  friend,  pays  the  full  demand  of  his  creditor,  it 
is  manifest,  that  the  creditor  is  obliged  in  justice  to  discharge  the 
debtor,  equally  as  if  the  agent  had  acted  by  delegation  from  the 
debtor.  Or  if  we  had  in  every  sense  delegated  and  commissioned 
Christ,  still  our  pardon  would  be  an  act  of  grace,  as  still  we  should 
be  treated  more  favorably  than  our  personal  characters  deserve. 

Now  to  apply  the  whole  of  this  to  the  subject  before  us :  If 
Christ  have,  in  the  proper  sense  of  the  words,  paid  the  debt  which 
we  owed  to  God,  whether  by  a  delegation  from  us  or  not ;  there 
can  be  no  more  grace  in  our  discharge,  than  if  we  had  paid  it  our- 
selves. 

.  But  the  fact  is,  that  Christ  has  not,  in  the  literal  and  proper 
sense,  paid  the  debt  for  us.  It  is  indeed  true,  that  our  deliverance 
is  called  a  redemption,  which  refers  to  the  deliverance  of  a  priso- 
ner out  of  captivity,  commonly  effected  by  paying  a  certain  sum 
as  the  price  of  his  liberty.  In  the  same  strain,  Christ  is  said  to 
give  himself  a  ransom  for  many,  and  christians  are  said  to  be 
bought  with  a  price,  etc.  all  which  scripture  expressions  bring 
into  view  the  payment  of  money,  or  the  discharge  of  a  debt. 
But  it  is  to  be  remembered,  that  these  are  metaphorical  expres- 
sions, and  therefore  not  literally  and  exactly  true.  We  had  not 
deprived  God  of  his  property ;  we  had  not  robbed  the  treasury 
of  heaven.  God  was  possessed  of  as  much  property  after  the  fall 
as  before ;  the  universe  and  the  fulness  thereof  still  remained  his. 
Therefore  when  Christ  made  satisfaction  for  us,  he  refunded  no 
property.  As  none  had  been  taken  away,  none  needed  to  be  re- 
funded. But  we  had  rebelled  against  God,  we  had  practically 
despised  his  law  and  authority,  and  it  was  necessary,  that  his  au- 
thority should  be  supported,  and  that  it  should  be  made  to  appear, 
that  sin  shall  not  go  without  proper  tokens  of  divine  displeasure 
and  abhorrence  ;  that  God  will  maintain  his  law  ;  that  his  author- 
ity and  government  shall  not  be  suffered  to  fall  into  contempt ; 
and  that  God  is  a  friend  to  virtue  and  holiness,  and  an  irreconci- 
lable enemy  to  transgression,  sin  and  vice.  These  things  were 
necessary  to  be  made  manifest,  and  the  clear  manifestation  of 
these  things,  if  we  will  use  the  term,  was  the  debt  which  was  due 
to  God.  This  manifestation  was  made  in  the  sufferings  and  death 
of  Christ.  But  Christ  did  not,  in  the  literal  sense,  pay  the  debt 
we  owed  to  God ;  if  he  had  paid  it,  all  grace  would  have  been 
excluded  from  the  pardon  of  the  sinner.     Therefore, 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  2? 

(3)  Others,  seeing  clearly  that  these  solutions  of  the  difficulty 
are  not  satisfactory,  have  said,  that  the  atonement  of  Christ  con-  , 
sisted,  not  in  the  payment  of  a  debt,  but  in  the  vindication  of . 
the  divine  law  and  character ;  that  Christ  made  this  vindication, 
by  practically  declaring  the  justice  of  the  law,  in  his  active  obe- 
dience, and  by  submitting  to  the  penalty  of  it,  in  his  death  ;  that 
as  what  Christ  did  and  suffered  in  the  flesh,  was  a  declaration  of 
the  rectitude  of  the  divine  law  and  character,  so  it  was  a  declara- 
tion of  the  evil  of  sin  ;  and  the  greater  the  evil  of  sin  appears  to 
be,  the  greater  the  grace  of  pardon  appears  to  be.  Therefore  the 
atonement  of  Christ  is  so  far  from  diminishing  the  grace  of  par- 
don, that  it  magnifies  it.  The  sum  of  this  is,  that  since  the  atone- 
ment consists,  not  in  the  payment  of  a  debt,  but  in  the  vindica- 
tion of  the  divine  law  and  character  ;  therefore  it  is  not  at  all  op- 
posed to  free  grace  in  pardon. 

Concerning  this  stating  of  the  matter,  I  beg  leave  to  observe ; 
that  if  by  a  vindication  of  the  divine  law  and  character,  be 
meant,  proof  given  that  the  law  of  God  is  just,  and  that  the  di- 
vine character  is  good  and  irreproachable  ;  I  can  by  no  means 
suppose,  that  the  atonement  consisted  in  a  vindication  of  the  law 
and  character  of  God.  The  law  is  no  more  proved  to  be  just, 
and  the  character  of  God  is  no  more  proved  to  be  good,  by  the 
perfect  obedience  and  death  of  Christ,  than  the  same  things  are 
proved  by  the  perfect  obedience  of  the  angels,  and  by  the  tor- 
ments of  the  damned.  But  I  shall  have  occasion  to  enlarge  on 
this  point  by  and  by. 

Again  ;  if  by  vindication  of  the  divine  law  and  character,  be 
meant,  proof  given  that  God  is  determined  to  support  the  author- 
ity of  his  law,  and  that  he  will  not  suffer  it  to  fall  into  contempt ; 
that  he  will  also  support  his  own  dignity,  will  act  a  consistent 
part  in  legislation  and  in  the  execution  of  his  law,  and  will  not 
be  disobeyed  with  impunity,  or  without  proper  satisfaction  ;  I 
grant,  that  by  Christ  the  divine  law  and  character  are  vindica- 
ted ;  so  that  God  can  now  consistently  with  his  own  honor,  and 
the  authority  of  his  law,  forgive  the  sinner.  But  how  does  this 
make  it  appear  that  there  is  any  grace  in  the  pardon  of  the  sin- 
ner, when  Christ  as  his  substitute,  hath  made  full  atonement  for 
him,  by  vindicating  the  law  and  character  of  God  ?  What  if  the 
sinner  himself,  instead  of  Christ,  had  by  obedience  and  suffer- 
ing, vindicated  the  law  and  character  of  God  ;  and  in  consequence 
had  been  released  from  further  punishment  ?  Would  his  release 
in  this  case,  have  been  by  grace,  or  by  justice  1  Doubtless  by 
the  latter  and  not  by  the  former ;  for  "  to  him  that  worketh,  is 
the  reward  reckoned,  not  of  grace,  but  of  debt,"  Rom.  4:  4. 


h:^*^- 
'j*.' 


28  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

Therefore  why  is  it  not  equally  an  act  of  justice,  to  release  the 
sinner,  in  consequence  of  the  same  vindication  made  by  Christ  1 
Payment  of  debt  equally  precludes  grace,  when  made  by  a  third 
person,  as  when  made  by  the  debtor  himself.  And  since  the 
vindication  of  the  divine  law  and  character,  made  by  the  sinner 
himself,  precludes  grace  from  the  release  of  the  sinner ;  why  does 
not  the  same  vindication  as  effectually  preclude  it  when  made  by 
a  third  person  ? 

Those  authors  who  give  us  this  solution  of  the  difficulty  under 
consideration,  seem  to  suppose  that  it  is  a  sufficient  solution  to 
say  that  the  atonement  consists,  not  in  the  payment  of  debt,  but 
in  the  vindication  of  the  divine  law  and  character  ;  and  what  they 
say,  seems  to  imply,  that  however  or  by  whomsoever,  that  vindi- 
cation be  made,  whether  by  the  sinner  himself,  or  any  other  per- 
son, it  is  not  at  all  opposed  to  the  exercise  of  grace  in  the  release 
of  the  sinner.  Whereas  it  appears  by  the  text  just  now  quoted 
and  by  many  others,  that  if  that  vindication  were  made  by  the 
sinner  himself,  it  would  shut  out  all  grace  from  his  release.  And 
I  presume  this  will  be  granted  by  those  authors  themselves,  on  a 
little  reflection.  To  say  otherwise,  is  to  say,  that  though  a  sinner 
should  endure  the  curse  of  the  law,  yet  there  would  be  grace  in 
his  subsequent  release.  It  seems  then  that  the  grace  of  pardon 
depends,  not  barely  on  this,  that  the  atonement  consists  in  a  vin- 
dication of  the  law  and  character  of  God ;  but  upon  this  partic- 
ular circumstance  attending  the  vindication,  that  it  be  made  by  a 
third  person.  And  if  this  circumstance  will  leave  room  for  grace 
in  the  release  of  the  sinner,  why  is  there  not  as  much  grace  in 
the  release  of  the  sinner,  though  the  atonement  of  Christ  be  a 
payment  of  the  sinner's  debt ;  since  the  payment  is  attended 
with  the  same  important  and  decisive  circumstance,  that  it  is 
made  by  a  third  person  ? 

Objection.  But  we  could  not  vindicate  the  law  and  character 
of  God ;  therefore  it  is  absurd  to  make  the  supposition,  and  to 
draw  consequences  from  the  supposition,  that  we  had  made  such 
a  vindication.  Answer.  It  is  no  more  absurd  to  make  this  sup- 
position, than  it  is  to  make  the  supposition,  tiiat  we  had  paid  the 
debt  to  divine  justice ;  for  we  could  no  more  do  this  than  we 
could  make  the  vindication  in  question.  And  if  it  follows  from 
this  circumstance,  that  we  neither  have  vindicated  nor  could  vin- 
dicate the  divine  character,  that  our  release  from  condemnation 
is  an  act  of  grace  ;  why  does  it  not  also  follow  from  the  circum- 
stance, that  we  neither  have  paid  nor  could  pay  the  debt  to  di- 
vine justice,  that  our  release  is  an  act  of  grace,  even  on  the  sup- 
position, that  Christ  has  in  the  literal  sense  paid  the  debt  for  us  ? 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  29 

Thus,  not  any  of  these  modes  of  solving  this  grand  difficulty, 
appears  to  be  satisfactory.  Even  this  last,  which  seemed  to  bid 
the  fairest  to  afford  satisfaction,  fails.     Therefore, 

2.  I  shall  suggest  some  considerations,  which  may  possibly 
lead  to  the  true  solution.  Tiie  question  before  us,  is,  whether 
pardon  tiirough  the  atonement  of  Christ  be  an  act  of  justice  or  of 
grace.  In  order  to  a  proper  answer  to  this  question,  it  is  of  pri- 
mary importance,  that  we  have  clear  and  determinate  ideas  affixed 
to  the  -words  justice  and  grace. 

I  find  the  word  justice  to  be  used  in  three  distinct  senses ; 
sometimes  it  means  commutative  justice,  sometimes  distributive 
justice,  and  sometimes  what  may  be  called  general  or  public 
justice. 

Commutative  justice  respects  property  and  matters  of  com- 
merce solely,  and  secures  to  every  man  his  own  property.  To 
treat  a  man  justly  in  this  sense,  is  not  to  deprive  him  of  his  pro- 
perty, and  whenever  it  falls  into  our  hands,  to  restore  it  duly,  or 
to  make  due  payment  of  debts.  In  one  word,  commutative  jus- 
tice is  to  violate  no  man's  property. 

Distributive  justice  consists  in  properly  rewarding  virtue  or 
good  conduct,  and  punishing  crimes  or  vicious  conduct ;  and  it 
has  respect  to  a  man's  personal  moral  character  or  conduct.  To 
treat  a  man  justly  in  this  sense,  is  to  treat  him  according  to  his 
personal  character  or  conduct.  Commutative  justice  in  the  recov- 
ery of  debts,  has  no  respect  at  all  to  the  character  or  conduct  of 
the  debtor,  but  merely  to  the  property  of  the  creditor.  Distribu- 
tive justice  in  the  punishment  of  crimes,  has  no  respect  at  all  to 
the  property  of  the  criminal ;  but  merely  to  his  personal  conduct ; 
unless  his  property  may,  in  some  instances,  enhance  his  crimes. 

General  or  public  justice  comprehends  all  moral  goodness ; 
and  though  the  word  is  often  used  in  this  sense,  it  is  really  an 
improper  use  of  it.  In  this  sense,  whatever  is  right,  is  said  to 
be  just,  or  an  act  of  justice ;  and  whatever  is  wrong  or  impro- 
per to  be  done,  is  said  to  be  unjust,  or  an  act  of  injustice.  To 
practise  justice  in  this  sense,  is  to  practise  agreeably  to  the  dic- 
tates of  general  benevolence,  or  to  seek  the  glory  of  God  and  the 
good  of  the  universe.  And  whenever  the  glory  of  God  is  neg- 
lected, it  may  be  said,  that  God  is  injured  or  deprived  of  his 
right.  Whenever  the  general  good  is  neglected  or  impeded,  the 
universe  may  be  said  to  suffer  an  injury.  For  instance  ;  if  Paul 
were  now  to  be  cast  down  from  heaven,  to  suffisr  the  pains  of  hell, 
it  would  be  wrong,  as  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  God's  cove- 
nant faithfulness,  with  the  designed  exhibition  of  his  glorious 
grace,  and  with  the  good  of  the  universe.     In  this  sense,  it  would 


30  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

not  be  just.  Yet  in  the  sense  of  distributive  justice,  such  a 
treatment  of  Paul  would  be  perfectly  just,  as  it  would  be  no  more 
than  correspondent  to  his  personal  demerits. 

The  term  grace,  comes  now  to  be  explained.  Grace  is  ever 
so  opposed  to  justice,  that  they  mutually  limit  each  other. 
Wherever  grace  begins,  justice  ends  ;  and  wherever  justice  be- 
gins, grace  ends.  Grace  as  opposed  to  commutative  justice  is 
gratuitously  to  relinquish  property  or  to  forgive  a  man  his  debt. 
And  commutative  injustice  is  to  demand  more  of  a  man,  than 
the  property  of  the  claimant.  Grace  as  opposed  to  justice  in 
the  distributive  sense,  is  to  treat  a  man  more  favorably  or  mild- 
ly, than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character  or  conduct. 
To  treat  him  unjustly  is  to  use  him  with  greater  severity,  than 
is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character.  It  is  to  be  remem- 
bered, that  in  personal  character  I  include  punishment  endured, 
as  well  as  actions  performed.  When  a  man  has  broken  any  law, 
and  has  afterwards  suffered  the  penalty  of  that  law  ;  as  he  has, 
by  the  transgression,  treated  the  law  with  contempt,  so  by  suf- 
fering the  penalty,  he  has  supported  the  authority  of  it ;  and  the 
latter  makes  a  part  of  his  personal  character,  as  he  stands  related 
to  that  law,  as  really  as  the  former. 

With  regard  to  the  third  kind  of  justice,  as  this  is  improperly 
called  justice,  as  it  comprehends  all  moral  goodness,  it  is  not  at 
all  opposed  to  grace ;  but  comprehends  that,  as  well  as  every 
other  virtue,  as  truth,  faithfulness,  meekness,  forgiveness,  pa- 
tience, prudence,  temperance,  fortitude,  etc.  All  these  are  right 
and  fit,  and  the  contrary  tempers  or  practices  are  wrong  and 
injurious  to  God  and  the  system  ;  and  therefore  in  this  sense  of 
justice  are  unjust.  And  even  grace  itself,  which  is  favor  to  the 
ill-deserving,  so  far  as  it  is  wise  and  proper  to  be  exercised, 
makes  but  a  part  of  this  kind  of  justice. 

We  proceed  now  to  apply  these  explanations  to  the  solution 
of  the  difficulty  under  consideration.  The  question  is  this  :  Is 
the  pardon  of  the  sinner  through  the  atonement  of  Christ,  an  act 
of  justice  or  of  grace  ?  To  which  I  answer,  that  with  respect  to 
commutative  ']\is,\\ce,  it  is  neither  an  act  of  justice  nor  of  grace. 
Because  commutative  justice  is  not  concerned  in  the  affair. 
We  neither  owed  money  to  the  Deity,  nor  did  Christ  pay  any  on 
our  behalf.  His  atonement  is  not  a  payment  of  our  debt.  If  it 
had  been,  our  discharge  would  have  been  an  act  of  mere  justice, 
and  not  of  grace.  To  make  the  sinner  also  pay  the  debt,  which 
had  been  already  paid  by  Christ,  would  be  manifestly  inju- 
rious, oppressive,  and  beyond  the  bounds  of  commutative  justice, 
the  rule  of  which  is,  that  every  man  retain  and  recover  his  own 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  31 

property,  and  that  only.  But  a  debt  being  paid,  by  whomsoever 
it  be  paid,  the  creditor  has  recovered  his  property,  and  therefore 
has  a  right  to  nothing  further.  If  he  extort,  or  attempt  to  extort, 
anything  further,  he  proceeds  beyond  his  right  and  is  guilty  of 
injustice.  So  that  if  Christ  had  paid  the  debt  for  the  belie v^er, 
he  would  be  discharged,  not  on  the  footing  of  grace,  but  of  strict 
justiqe. 

With  respect  to  distributive  justice  the  discharge  of  the  sin- 
ner is  wholly  an  act  of  grace.  This  kind  of  justice  has  respect 
solely  to  the  personal  character  and  conduct  of  its  object.  And 
then  is  a  man  treated  justly,  when  he  is  treated  according  to 
his  personal  moral  character.  If  he  be  treated  more  favorably 
than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character,  he  is  the  object 
of  grace.  I  say  personal  character ;  for  distributive  justice  has 
no  respect  to  the  character  of  a  third  person,  or  to  anything 
which  may  be  done  or  suffered  by  another  person,  than  by  him, 
who  is  the  object  of  this  justice,  or  who  is  on  trial,  to  be  reward- 
ed or  punished.  And  with  regard  to  the  case  now  before  us,  what 
if  Christ  has  made  atonement  for  sin  ?  This  atonement  con- 
stitutes no  part  of  the  personal  character  of  the  sinner  ;  but  his 
personal  character  is  essentially  the  same,  as  it  would  have  been, 
if  Christ  had  made  no  atonement.  As  the  sinner,  in  pardon,  is 
treated,  not  only  more  favorably,  but  infinitely  more  favorably, 
than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character,  his  pardon  is 
wholly  an  act  of  infinite  grace.  If  it  were,  in  the  sense  of  dis- 
tributive justice,  an  act  of  justice,  he  would  be  injured,  if  a  par- 
don were  refused  him.  But  as  the  case  is,  he  would  not  be  in- 
jured, though  a  pardon  were  refused  him  ;  because  he  would  not 
be  treated  more  unfavorably  than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal 
character. 

Therefore,  though  it  be  true,  that  if  a  third  person  pay  a  debt, 
there  would  be  no  grace  exercised  by  the  creditor,  in  discharg- 
ing the  debtor,  yet  when  a  third  person  atones  for  a  crime,  by 
suffering  in  the  stead  of  a  criminal,  there  is  an  entire  grace  in 
the  discharge  of  the  criminal,  and  distributive  justice  still  allows 
him  to  be  punished  in  his  own  person.  The  reason  is,  what  I 
have  mentioned  already,  that  justice  in  punishing  crimes,  respects 
the  personal  character  only  of  the  criminal ;  but  in  the  payment 
of  debts,  it  respects  the  recovery  of  property  only.  In  the  form- 
er case,  it  admits  of  any  treatment  which  is  according  to  his  per- 
sonal character  ;  in  the  latter  it  admits  of  nothing  beyond  the  re- 
covery of  property. 

So  that  though  Christ  has  made  complete  atonement  for  the 
sins  of  all  his  disciples,  and  they  are  justified  wholly  through  his 


32  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

redemption  ;  yet  they  are  justified  wholly  by  grace.  Because 
they  personally  have  not  made  atonement  for  their  sins,  or  suf- 
fered the  curse  of  the  law.  Therefore  they  have  no  claim  to  a 
discharge  on  account  of  their  own  personal  conduct  and  suffering. 
And  if  it  is  objected,  that  neither  is  a  debtor  discharged  on  ac- 
count of  anything  which  he  hath  done  personally,  when  he  is 
discharged  on  the  payment  of  his  debt  by  a  third  person  ;  yet 
justice  does  not  admit,  that  the  creditor  recover  the  debt  again 
from  the  debtor  himself ;  why  then  does  it  admit,  that  a  magis- 
trate inflict  the  punishment  of  a  crime  on  the  criminal  himself, 
when  atonement  has  been  made  by  a  substitute  ?  The  answer  is, 
that  justice  in  the  these  two  cases,  is  very  different,  and  respects 
very  different  objects.  In  criminal  causes,  it  respects  the  per- 
sonal conduct  or  character  of  the  criminal,  and  admits  of  any 
treatment  which  is  correspondent  to  that  conduct.  In  civil 
causes,  or  matters  of  debt,  it  respects  the  restitution  of  property 
only,  and  this  being  made,  it  admits  of  no  further  demand. 

In  the  third  sense  of  justice  before  explained,  according  to 
which  anything  is  just,  which  is  right  and  best  to  be  done  ;  the 
pardon  of  the  sinner  is  entirely  an  act  oi  justice.  It  is  undoubt- 
edly most  conducive  to  the  divine  glory,  and  general  good  of  the 
created  system,  that  every  believer  should  be  pardoned,  and 
therefore,  in  the  present  sense  of  the  word,  it  is  an  act  of  justice. 
The  pardon  of  the  sinner  is  equally  an  act  of  justice,  if,  as 
some  suppose,  he  be  pardoned  not  on  account  of  the  death  of 
Christ,  considered  as  an  equivalent  to  the  curse  of  the  law  de- 
nounced against  the  sinner ;  but  merely  on  account  of  the  posi- 
tive obedience  of  Christ.  If  this  be  the  mode  and  the  condition 
of  pardon  established  by  God,  doubtless  pardon  granted  in  this 
mode  and  on  this  condition,  is  most  conducive  to  the  divine  glo- 
ry and  the  general  good.  Therefore  it  is,  in  the  sense  of  justice 
now  under  consideration,  an  act  of  justice ;  insomuch  that  if 
pardon  were  not  granted  in  this  mode,  the  divine  glory  would  be 
tarnished,  and  the  general  good  diminished,  or  the  universe  would 
suffer  an  injury.  The  same  would  be  true,  if  God  had  in  fact 
granted  pardon,  without  any  atonement,  whether  by  suffering  or 
obedience.  We  might  have  argued  from  that  fact,  that  infinite 
wisdom  saw  it  to  be  most  conducive  to  the  divine  glory  and  the 
general  good,  to  pardon  without  an  atonement ;  and  of  course 
that  if  pardon  had  not  been  granted  in  this  way,  both  the  divine 
glory  and  general  good,  would  have  been  diminished,  and  injus- 
tice would  have  been  done  to  the  universe.  In  the  same  sense 
the  gift  of  Christ,  to  be  our  savior,  his  undertaking  to  save  us, 
and  every  other  gift  of  God  to  his  creatures,  are  acts  of  justice. 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  33 

But  it  must  be  remembered,  that  this  is  an  improper  sense  of  the 
word  justice,  and  is  not  at  all  opposed  to  grace,  but  implies  it. 
For  all  those  divine  acts  and  gifts  just  mentioned,  though  in  this 
sense  they  are  acts  of  justice,  yet  are  at  the  same  time,  acts  of 
pu7'e  grace. 

In  this  sense  of  justice,  the  word  seems  to  be  used  by  the 
apostle  Paul,  Rom.  3:  26,  "  To  declare  his  righteousness,  (or 
justice,)  that  he  might  he  just  and  the  justifier  of  him  which  be- 
lieveth  in  Jesus."  That  God  might  be  just  to  himself  and  to  the 
universe.  Again  in  Psalm  85:  10,  "  Mercy  and  truth  are  met 
together,  righteousness  and  peace  have  kissed  each  other." 
Righteousness,  in  the  distributive  sense,  hath  not  kissed  peace 
with  respect  to  the  sinner ;  so  far  as  it  speaks  anything,  it 
calls  for  his  punishment.  But  the  public  good,  and  the  divine 
glory  admit  of  peace  with  the  sinner.  In  the  same  sense  the 
word  occurs  in  the  version  of  the  Psalms  in  common  use  among 
us,  where  it  is  said  "justice  is  pleased  and  peace  is  given." 
Again  in  the  catechism  of  the  assembly  of  divines,  where  they 
say,  "  Christ  offered  up  himself  a  sacrifice  to  satisfy  diwme  justice." 

Thus  it  appears,  that  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  in  reference  to 
distributive  justice,  which  is  the  only  proper  sense  of  the  word, 
with  respect  to  this  matter,  is  entirely  an  act  of  grace,  and  that, 
although  he  is  pardoned  wholly  through  the  redemption  of  Jesus 
Christ. 

It  is  in  the  same  sense  an  act  of  grace,  as  the  gift  of  Christ,  or 
any  other  most  gracious  act  of  God.  Though  the  sinner  is  par- 
doned wholly  through  the  redemption  of  Christ,  yet  his  pardon 
is  an  act  of  pure  grace,  because  in  it  he  is  treated  inconceivably 
more  favorably  than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal   character. 

The  pardon  of  the  sinner,  on  this  plan  of  the  redemption  or 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  is  as  entirely  an  act  of  grace,  as  if  it  had 
been  granted  on  an  atonement  made,  not  by  the  sufferings  of 
Christ,  but  merely  by  his  active  obedience.  For  if  we  suppose, 
that  the  atonement  of  Christ  consists  wholly  in  the  obedience  of 
Christ,  not  in  his  sufferings,  in  what  sense  would  the  pardon  of 
the  sinner  be  an  act  of  grace,  in  which  it  is  not  an  act  of  grace 
on  the  hypothesis  concerning  the  atonement  which  hath  been 
now  stated  ?  Pardon  is  no  more  procured  by  the  payment  of 
the  sinner's  debt,  in  the  one  case,  than  in  the  other.  If  it  be 
said  that  Christ's  suffering  the  curse  of  the  law  is  the  payment  of 
the  debt ;  I  answer,  this  is  no  more  a  payment  of  the  debt,  than 
the  obedience  of  Christ.  If  it  be  said  that  Christ's  obedience  only 
honors  and  magnifies  the  law  ;  I  answer,  No  more  is  done  by  the 
sufferings  of  Chiist.     It  is  true,  that  if  the  sinner  be  pardoned 

Vol.  II.  4 


34  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

on  account  of  Christ's  obedience,  he  is  treated  more  favorably 
than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character.  But  the  same 
is  true,  if  he  be  pardoned  on  account  of  Christ's  sufferings.  If 
it  be  said,  that  in  the  one  case,  Christ  suffers,  as  the  substitute 
of  the  sinner  ;  I  answer,  in  the  other  case  he  obeys  as  the  substi- 
tute of  the  sinner.  In  the  one  case,  Christ  has  by  his  suffer- 
ings made  it  consistent  with  the  general  good,  to  pardon  the 
sinner ;  in  the  other  case,  he  has  made  the  same  thing  consistent 
with  the  general  good,  by  his  obedience.  And  if  this  circum- 
stance, that  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  is  consistent  with  the  gene- 
ral good,  abolishes  grace  from  his  pardon  in  the  one  case,  the 
same  circumstance  is  productive  of  the  same  effect,  in  the  other. 
The  truth  is,  that  in  both  cases,  the  whole  grace  of  pardon  con- 
sists in  this,  and  this  only,  that  the  sinner  is  treated  infinitely 
more  favorably,  than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character. 

Again  ;  according  to  this  scheme  of  the  atonement,  the  pardon 
of  the  sinner,  is  as  wholly  an  act  of  grace,  as  if  he  had  been  par- 
doned without  any  atonement  at  all.  If  the  sinner  had  been 
pardoned  without  any  atonement,  he  would  have  been  treated 
more  favorably  than  is  correspondent  to  his  own  character ;  and 
so  he  is,  when  pardoned  through  the  atonement  of  Christ.  In 
the  former  case,  he  would  be  pardoned,  without  a  payment  of  his 
debt ;  so  he  is  in  the  latter.  If  the  measures  taken  by  God,  to 
secure  the  public  good,  those  measures  consisting  neither  in  any 
personal  doing  or  suffering  of  the  sinner,  nor  in  the  payment  of 
debt,  be  inconsistent  with  grace  in  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  in 
the  one  case  ;  doubtless  whatever  measures  are  taken  by  God,  to 
secure  the  public  good  in  the  other  case,  are  equally  inconsistent 
with  grace  in  pardon.  And  no  man  will  pretend,  that  if  God  do 
pardon  the  sinner  without  an  atonement,  he  will  pardon  him  in  a 
way  which  is  inconsistent  with  the  public  good.  In  this  view  of 
the  objection,  either  the  bare  circumstance  that  the  pardon  of  the 
sinner  is  consistent  with  the  public  good,  is  that  which  abolishes 
the  grace  of  pardon  ;  or  it  is  the  particular  mode,  in  which  the 
consistence  of  pardon  and  the  public  good,  is  brought  about.  If 
the  bare  circumstance  of  the  consistence  of  pardon  and  the  pub- 
lic good,  be  that  which  abolishes  the  grace  of  pardon  ;  then  it 
seems,  that  in  order  that  any  pardon  may  be  gracious,  it  must  be 
inconsistent  with  the  public  good  ;  and  therefore  the  pardon  of 
the  sinner  without  any  atonement,  being  by  the  concession  of  the 
objector  a  gracious  act,  is  inconsistent  with  the  general  good  of 
the  universe,  and  with  the  glory  and  perfections  of  God,  and 
therefore  can  never  be  granted  by  God,  as  long  as  he  is  possessed 
of  infinite  perfection  and  goodness,  whereby  he  is  necessarily  dispo- 
sed to  seek  the  good  of  the  universal  system,  or  of  his  own  kingdom. 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  35 

Or  if  it  be  said,  that  it  is  the  particular  mode,  in  which  the 
consistence  between  pardon  and  the  public  good  is  brought  about, 
which  aboHshes  the  grace  of  pardon  ;  in  this  case  it  is  incumbent 
on  the  objector,  to  point  out  what  there  is  in  the  mode,  which  is 
opposed  to  grace  in  pardon.  He  cannot  pretend,  that  in  this 
mode,  the  debt  of  the  sinner  is  paid,  or  that  in  repentance  the 
sinner's  personal  character  is  so  altered,  that  he  now  deserves  no 
punishment.  If  this  were  the  case,  there  would  certainly  be  no 
grace  in  his  pardon.  It  is  no  grace,  and  no  pardon,  not  to  pun- 
ish a  man  wlio  deserves  no  punishment.  If  the  objector  were  to 
hold,  tiiat  the  personal  character  of  the  sinner  is  so  altered  by  re- 
pentance, that  he  no  longer  deserves  punishment,  he  would  at 
once  confute  his  own  scheme  of  gracious  pardon. 

Neither  can  it  be  pretended,  by  the  advocates  for  pardon 
without  atonement,  that  there  is  any  grace  in  pardon,  in  any 
other  view  tiian  this,  that  the  sinner  is  treated  more  favorably, 
than  is  correspondent  to  his  personal  character.  And  pardon  on 
such  an  atonement  as  Christ  hath  made,  is,  in  the  same  view,  an 
act  of  grace.  So  that  if  the  true  idea  of  grace,  with  respect  to 
this  subject  be,  a  treatment  of  a  sinner  more  favorable  than  is 
correspondent  to  his  personal  character ;  the  pardon  of  the  sin- 
ner through  the  atonement  of  Christ,  is  an  act  oi pure  grace.  If 
this  be  not  the  true  idea  of  grace,  let  a  better  be  given,  and  I  am 
willing  to  examine  it ;  and  I  presume  that  on  the  most  thorough 
examination  of  the  matter,  it  will  be  found,  that  there  is  as  much 
grace  in  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  through  the  atonement  of  Christ, 
as  without  any  atonement  at  all.  Surely  it  will  not  be  pleaded, 
that  it  is  no  act  of  grace  to  treat  a  sinner  more  favorably  than  is 
correspondent  to  his  own  personal  character  ;  if  such  treatment 
be  not  more  favorable  than  is  correspondent  to  the  personal  chai- 
acter  of  some  other  man,  or  some  other  being ;  and  that  it  is  no 
act  of  grace  in  a  prince  to  pardon  a  criminal,  from  respect  to  the 
merits  of  the  criminal's  father  ;  or  that  if  one  nobleman  had  been 
the  murderer  of  another,  there  would  have  been  no  grace  exer- 
cised in  the  pardon  of  the  former,  from  respect  to  the  interces- 
sion of  some  powerful  court. 

On  every  other  hypothesis  concerning  the  mode  or  condition 
of  pardon,  it  must  be  allowed,  that  God  dispenses  pardon,  from 
regard  to  some  circumstance,  or  juncture  of  circumstances,  which 
renders  the  pardon  both  consistent  with  the  general  good,  and 
subservient  to  it ;  and  whatever  this  be,  whether  the  death  of 
Christ,  or  anything  else,  provided  it  be  not  the  payment  of  money, 
and  provided  the  personal  character  of  the  sinner  be  the  same,  it 
is  equally  consistent  or  inconsistent  with  grace  in  pardon. 


36  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

In  short,  the  whole  strength  of  this  objection,  in  which  the 
Sociiiians  have  so  much  triumphed,  that  complete  atonement  is 
inconsistent  with  grace  in  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  depends  on 
the  supposition,  that  the  atonement  of  Christ  consists  in  the  lite- 
ral payment  of  a  debt  which  we  owed  to  God ;  and  this  ground- 
less supposition  being  set  aside,  the  objection  itself  appears 
equally  groundless,  and  vanishes  like  dew  before  the  sun. 

Whatever  hypothesis  we  adopt  concerning  the  pardon  of  the 
sinner,  whether  we  suppose  it  to  be  granted  on  account  of  the 
death  of  Christ  ;  or  on  account  of  tiie  obedience  of  Christ ; 
or  absolutely  without  any  atonement ;  all  will  agree  in  this, 
that  it  is  granted  in  such  a  way,  or  on  such  conditions  only, 
as  are  consistent  with  the  general  good  of  the  moral  system, 
and  from  a  regard  to  some  event  or  circumstance,  or  junc- 
ture of  circumstances,  which  causes  pardon  to  be  consistent 
with  the  general  good.  And  that  circumstance  or  juncture 
of  circumstances,  may  as  well  be  called  the  price  of  pardon, 
the  ransom  of  the  sinner,  etc.  as  the  death  of  Christ.  And 
whereas  it  is  objected,  that  if  God  grant  a  pardon  from  respect  to 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  we  are  under  no  obligation  to  God  for 
the  grace  of  pardon  ;  I  answer  that  whenever  God  grants  a  par- 
don, from  respect  to  the  circumstance  or  juncture  of  circum- 
stances before  mentioned,  it  may  as  well  be  pleaded,  that  the  sin- 
ner so  pardoned,  is  under  no  obligations  of  gratitude  to  God,  o?i 
account  of  his  pardon  ;  for  that  it  was  granted  from  regard  to 
the  general  good,  or  to  that  circumstance  which  rendered  it  con- 
sistent with  the  general  good,  and  not  from  any  gracious  regard 
to  Mm ;  or  that  if  he  be  under  any  obligation  to  God,  it  is  to 
him  as  the  author  of  that  circumstance  or  juncture  of  circum- 
stances, which  renders  his  pardon  consistent  with  the  general 
good,  and  not  to  him,  as  the  dispenser  of  his  pardon  ;  as  it  is  ob- 
jected, that  if,  on  the  scheme  of  pardon  through  the  atonement 
of  Christ,  we  be  under  any  obligation  to  God  at  all,  it  is  merely 
on  account  of  the  provision  of  the  atonement,  and  not  on  account 
of  pardon  itself. 

Perhaps  some,  unwilling  to  relinquish  this  objection,  may  say, 
Though  it  be  true,  that  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  on  account  of 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  be  a  J'eal  act  of  grace ;  would  it  not 
have  been  an  act  of  greater  grace,  to  pardon  absolutely,  with- 
out an  atonement  ?  This  question  is  capable  of  a  twofold  con- 
struction. If  the  meaning  be.  Whether  there  would  not  have 
been  more  grace  manifested  towards  the  sinner,  if  his  pardon 
had  been  granted  without  any  atonement?  I  answer,  by  no 
means ;  because  to  put  the  question  in  this  sense,  is  the  same  as 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  37 

to  ask,  Whether  the  favor  of  pardon  granted  without  an  atone- 
ment, would  not  be  greater  in  comparison  with  the  sinner's  per- 
sonal character,  than  it  is  when  granted  on  account  of  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ,  Or  whether  there  would  not  have  been  a  great- 
er distance  between  the  good  of  pardon,  and  the  demerit  of  the 
sinner's  personal  character,  if  his  pardon  had  been  granted 
without  an  atonement,  than  if  it  be  granted  on  account  of  the 
atonement  of  Christ.  But  the  good,  the  safety,  the  indemnity  of 
pardon,  or  of  deliverance  from  condemnation,  is  the  very  same, 
in  whatever  way  it  be  granted,  whether  through  an  atonement 
or  not,  whether  in  a  way  of  grace  or  in  a  way  of  debt,  whether 
from  a  regard  to  the  merits  of  Christ,  or  the  merits  of  the  sinner 
himself.  Again,  the  personal  character  of  the  sinner  is  also  the 
same,  whether  he  be  pardoned  through  an  atonement  or  not.  If 
his  pardon  be  granted  without  an  atonement,  it  makes  not  the 
demerit  of  his  personal  character  and  conduct  the  greater ;  or  if 
it  be  granted  on  account  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  it  makes 
not  the  demerit  of  his  personal  character  the  less.  Therefore  as 
the  good  of  pardon  is  the  same,  in  whatever  way  it  be  granted, 
and  the  personal  character  of  the  sinner  pardoned  is  the  same  ; 
the  distance  between  the  good  of  pardon,  and  the  demerit  of  the 
sinner's  character  is  also  the  same,  whether  he  be  pardoned  on 
account  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  or  absolutely,  without  any 
atonement.  Of  course  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  is  not  an  act  of 
greater  grace  to  him  personally,  if  granted  without  regard  to  any 
atonement,  than  if  granted  from  regard  to  the  atonement  of  Christ. 
But  perhaps  the  meaning  of  the  question  stated  above,  is, 
Whether,  if  the  sinner  had  been  pardoned,  without  an  atone- 
ment, it  would  not  have  exhibited  greater  grace,  in  the  divine 
mind,  or  greater  goodness  in  God  ;  and  whether  in  this  mode 
of  pardon,  greater  good  would  not  have  accrued  to  the  universe. 
The  answer  to  this  question,  wholly  depends  on  the  necessity  of 
an  atonement,  which  I  have  endeavored  briefly  to  show,  in  the 
preceding  discourse.  If  an  atonement  be  necessary  to  support 
the  authority  of  the  law  and  of  the  moral  government  of  God,  it 
is  doubtless  necessary  to  the  public  good  of  the  moral  system,  or 
to  the  general  good  of  the  universe  and  to  the  divine  glory.  This 
being  granted  or  established,  the  question  just  now  stated,  comes 
to  this  simply,  whether  it  exhibits  greater  grace  and  goodness  in 
the  divine  mind,  and  secures  greater  good  to  the  universe,  to  par- 
don sin  in  such  a  mode,  as  is  consistent  with  the  general  good  of 
the  universe  ;  or  in  such  a  mode  as  is  inconsistent  with  that  im- 
portant object ; — a  question  which  no  man,  from  regard  to  his 
own  reputation,  would  choose  to  propose. 

4* 


38  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 


SERMON    III. 


Ephesians  1 :  7. — In  whotn  tve  have  redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins,  according  to  the  riches  of  his  grace. 

Having  in  the  preceding  discourses,  considered  the  particulars 
at  first  proposed,  which  were,  That  we  can  obtain  forgiveness,  in 
no  otlier  way,  than  through  the  redemption  of  Clirist — the  reason 
or  ground  of  this  mode  of  forgiveness — and  the  consistency  be- 
tween the  complete  atonement  of  Christ,  and  free  grace  in  for- 
giveness ;  the  way  is  prepared  for  the  following  inferences  and 
reflections. 

1.  If  the  atonement  of  Christ  be  a  substitute  for  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner  according  to  the  divine  law,  and  be  designed 
to  support  the  authority  of  that  law,  equally  as  the  punishment  of 
hell ;  then  we  may  infer,  that  the  atonement  of  Christ  does  not 
consist  in  showing,  that  the  divine  law  is  just.  With  regard 
to  this,  I  venture  to  assert  two  things :  That  the  obedience  and 
death  of  Christ  do  not  prove,  that  the  divine  law  is  just.  That 
if  they  did  prove  this,  still  merely  by  that  circumstance,  they 
would  make  no  atonement. 

(1)  The  obedience  and  death  of  Christ  do  not  prove,  that  the 
divine  law  is  a  just  law.  The  sufferings  of  Christ  no  more  prove 
this,  than  the  punishment  of  the  damned  proves  it.  The  former 
are  the  substitute  of  the  latter,  and  were  designed  for  substance 
to  prove  and  exhibit  the  same  truths,  and  to  answer  the  same 
ends.  But  who  will  say  that  the  torments  of  the  damned  prove 
the  justice  of  the  divine  law  ?  No  more  is  this  proved  by  the 
sufferings  of  Christ.  If  the  justice  of  the  divine  law  be  called  in 
question,  the  justice  and  moral  perfection  of  God  is  of  course 
equally  called  in  question.  This  being  the  case,  whatever  he 
can  do,  whether  by  obedience  or  suffering,  to  testify  the  justice 
of  the  law,  must  be  considered  as  the  testimony  of  a  party  in  his 
own  cause  ;  and  also  as  the  testimony  of  a  being  whose  integri- 
ty is  as  much  disputed,  as  the  justice  of  the  law.  It  cannot 
therefore  be  received  as  proof  in  the  case.  The  testimony  of 
God,  whether  given  in  obedience  or  suffering,  so  long  as  his 
<;haracter  is  disputed,  as  it  will  be,  so  long  as  the  justice  of  his 
law  is  disputed  ;  proves  neither  that  the  law  is  just,  in  I'eality, 
nor  that  it  is  so  in  his  own  estimation.  A  being  of  a  disputed 
character  may  be  supposed  to  testify,  both  contrary  to  reality, 
and  contrary  to  his  own  knowledge.     And  as  the  character  of 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  89 

the  deity  is  disputed,  by  those  who  dispute  the  justice  of  the  di- 
vine law  ;  so  there  is  the  same  foundation  to  dispute  the  charac- 
ter and  testimony  of  the  Son  of  God.  Therefore  the  obedience 
and  death  of  Christ  do  not  prove,  that  the  divine  law  is  just. 

(2)  If  the  obedience  and  death  of  Christ  did  prove  that  the 
law  is  just ;  still  by  this  circumstance,  they  would  make  no  atone- 
ment for  sin.  If  it  were  a  truth,  that  the  obedience  and  death 
of  Christ  did  prove  the  divine  law  to  be  just,  and  merely  on  that 
account  made  atonement,  the  ground  of  this  truth  would  be,  that 
whatever  makes  it  manifest  that  the  law  is  just,  makes  atone- 
ment. The  essence  of  the  atonement  on  this  hypothesis,  is 
placed  in  the  manifestation  of  the  justice  of  the  divine  law. 
Therefore  this  manifestation,  however,  or  by  whomsoever  it  be 
made,  is  an  atonement.  But  as  the  law  is  really  just,  it  was 
doubtless  in  the  power  of  infinite  wisdom  to  manifest  the  justice 
of  it,  to  rational  creatures,  without  either  the  obedience  or  the 
death  of  Christ,  or  of  any  other  person.  If  it  were  not  in  the 
power  of  infinite  wisdom  to  manifest  the  justice  of  the  divine  law, 
without  the  death  of  Christ ;  then  if  Christ  had  not  died,  but  all 
men  had  perished  according  to  the  law,  it  never  would  have  ap- 
peared that  the  law  is  just.  But  bare  attention  to  the  law  itself, 
to  the  reason,  ground,  and  necessity  of  it,  especially  when  this 
attention  is  excited,  and  the  powers  of  the  mind  are  aided,  by 
even  such  a  divine  influence,  as  God  does  in  fact  sometimes  give 
to  men  of  the  most  depraved  characters,  is  sufficient  to  con- 
vince of  the  justice  of  the  law.  But  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
the  sanctifying  and  savingly  illuminating  influences  of  the  spirit 
of  God,  without  the  obedience  and  death  of  Christ,  would  con- 
vince any  man  of  the  justice  of  the  law.  We  have  no  more  rea- 
son to  dispute  this,  than  to  dispute,  whether  the  angels  who  kept 
their  first  estate,  did  believe  the  justice  of  the  law,  before  they 
were  informed  of  the  incarnation  and  death  of  Christ.  Accord- 
ing to  this  hypothesis  therefore,  all  that  was  necessary  to  make 
atonement  for  mankind,  was  to  communicate  to  them  sanctifying 
grace,  or  to  lead  them  to  repentance  ;  and  as  to  Christ,  he  is 
dead  in  vain. 

Besides  ;  if  the  obedience  and  death  of  Christ  did  ever  so  cred- 
ibly manifest  the  justice  of  the  law,  what  atonement,  what  satis- 
faction for  sin,  would  this  make  ?  how  would  this  support  the 
authority  of  the  law  ?  how  would  this  make  it  appear,  that  the 
transgressor  may  expect  the  most  awful  consequences  from  his 
transgression  ?  or  that  transgression  is  infinitely  abominable  in  the 
sight  of  God  ?  And  how  would  the  manifestation  of  the  justice 
of  the  law,   tend  to  restrain  men  from  transgressing  that  law  ? 


40  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

Whatever  the  effect  of  such  manifestation  might  be  on  the  minds 
of  those  innocent  creatures,  who  have  regard  to  justice  or  moral 
rectitude ;  yet  on  the  minds  of  those  who  are  disposed  to  trans- 
gress, and  have  lost  the  proper  sense  of  moral  rectitude,  the  man- 
ifestation would  have  no  effectual  tendency  to  restrain  them  from 
transgression  ;  and  therefore  would  in  no  degree  answer  the  ends 
of  the  punishment  threatened  in  the  law,  nor  be  any  atonement 
for  sin. 

Perhaps  some  may  suppose,  that  what  has  now  been  asserted, 
that  the  death  or  atonement  of  Christ  does  not  prove  the  justice 
of  God  and  of  his  law,  is  inconsistent  with  what  hath  been  re- 
peatedly suggested  in  the  preceding  discourses,  that  it  is  an  end 
of  the  death  or  atonement  of  Christ,  to  manifest  how  hateful  sin 
is  to  God.  If  the  death  of  Christ  manifest  God's  hatred  of  sin, 
it  would  seem  that  the  same  event  must  also  manifest  God's  love 
of  holiness  and  justice.  In  answer  to  this,  I  observe,  that  the 
death  of  Christ  manifests  God's  hatred  of  sin  and  love  of  holiness, 
in  the  same  sense  as  the  damnation  of  the  wicked  manifests  these, 
viz.  on  the  supposition  that  the  divine  law  is  just  and  holy.  If  it  be 
allowed  that  the  divine  law  is  just  and  holy,  then  everything  done 
to  support  and  execute  that  law,  is  a  declaration  in  favor  of  ho- 
liness and  against  sin  ;  or  a  declaration  of  God's  love  of  holiness 
and  of  his  hatred  of  iniquity.  Both  the  punishment  of  the  dam- 
ned, and  the  death  of  Christ  declare  God's  hatred  of  all  trans- 
gressions of  his  law.  And  if  that  law  be  holy,  to  hate  the  trans- 
gressions of  it,  is  to  hate  sin,  and  at  the  same  time  to  love  holi- 
ness. But  if  the  law  be  not  holy,  no  such  consequence  will  fol- 
low ;  it  cannot,  on  that  supposition,  be  inferred  from  the  divine 
hatred  of  transgression,  that  God  either  hates  sin,  or  loves  holi- 
ness. 

2.  Again ;  we  may  infer  from  the  preceding  doctrine,  that 
the  atonement  of  Christ  does  not  consist  essentially  in  his  active 
or  positive  obedience.  By  atonement  I  mean  that  which,  as  a 
substitute  for  the  punishment  threatened  in  the  law,  supports  the 
authority  of  that  law,  and  the  dignity  of  the  divine  government. 
But  the  obedience  of  Christ,  even  in  the  most  trying  circum- 
stances, without  any  tokens  of  the  divine  displeasure  against  the 
transgressors  of  the  law,  would  never  support  the  authority  of 
the  law,  and  the  dignity  of  the  divine  government.  It  by  no 
means  makes  it  appear,  that  it  is  an  evil  and  bitter  thing  to  violate 
the  law,  and  that  the  violation  of  it  deserves,  and  may  be  expect- 
ed to  be  followed  with  most  awful  consequences  to  him,  who  dares 
to  violate  it.  A  familiar  example  may  illustrate  this  matter.  It 
is  the  rule  or  law  of  a  certain  family,  that  a  particular  child  shall 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  41 

steadily  attend  the  school  kept  in  the  neighborhood,  and  that  if 
he  absent  himself  for  a  day,  without  license,  he  shall  feel  the  rod. 
However  after  some  time  the  child  being  weary  of  observing  this 
law,  does  absent  himself,  and  spend  the  day  in  play.  At  night 
the  father  being  informed  of  it,  arraigns  the  child,  finds  him 
guilty,  and  prepares  to  inflict  the  punishment,  which  he  had 
threatened.  At  this  instant,  the  brother  of  the  offending  child 
intercedes,  acknowledges  the  reasonableness  of  the  law,  which 
his  brother  hath  transgressed,  confesses  that  he  deserves  the  pen- 
alty, but  offers  himself  to  make  satisfaction  for  his  brother's  offence. 
Being  interrogated  by  what  means  he  expects  to  make  satisfac- 
tion ;  he  answers.  By  going  himself  to  school  the  next  day.  Now 
can  any  one  suppose,  that  in  this  way  the  second  child  can  make 
satisfaction  for  the  offence  of  the  first  ?  Or  that  if  the  father 
were  to  accept  the  proposal,  he  would  find  the  authority  of  his 
law,  and  the  government  of  his  family  supported  with  dignity  ? 
Or  that  the  offending  child,  or  the  other  children  of  the  family, 
would  by  this  means  be  effectually  deterred  from  future  offences 
of  the  like  nature  ?  And  however  trying  the  circumstances  of 
going  to  school  may  be,  if  those  circumstances  be  no  token  of  the 
father's  displeasure  at  the  disobedient  child's  transgression  ;  still 
the  going  to  school  of  the  second  child,  w^ill  not  make  the  least 
satisfaction  for  the  offence  of  the  first.*  ( '  ^ 

I  venture  to  say  further,  That  the  atonement  of  Christ  not  only 
did  not  consist  essentially  in  his  active  obedience,  but  that  his 
active  obedience  was  no  part  of  his  atonement  properly  so  called, 
nor  essential  to  it.  The  perfect  obedience  of  Christ  was  doubt- 
less necessary  to  the  due  execution  of  his  prophetical  and  kingly 
office  ;  in  order  to  his  intercession  ;  and  also  that  the  salvation 
of  his  disciples  might  be  a  reward  of  his  obedience.  But  that  it 
was  necessary  to  support  the  authority  of  the  divine  law  in  the 
pardon  of  sinners,  does  not  appear.  If  Christ  himself  could  pos- 
sibly have  been  a  sinner,  and  had  first  made  satisfaction  for  his 
own  sin  ;  it  does  not  appear,  but  that  afterward  he  might  also  sat- 
isfy for  the  sins  of  his  people.  If  the  pretender  to  the  crown  of 
Great  Britain,  should  wage  war  against  king  George,  in  the  course 
of  the  war  should  be  taken,  should  be  brought  to  trial,  and  be 
condemned  to  the  block  ;  will  any  man  say  that  the  king  of  France, 
by  becoming  the  substitute  of  the  pretender,  and  suffering  in  his 
stead,  could  not  make  atonement  for  the  pretender,  so  as  effec- 

*  Objection.  The  virtues  of  Christ's  obedience  to  make  atonement  con- 
sists in  this,  that  he  undertook  to  obey  in  man's  stead,  when  he  was  under 
no  obligation  so  to  do.  Answer.  Nor  is  the  second  child  in  the  case  stated 
above,  under  obligation  to  undertake  to  go  to  school  for  liis  brother.  ,, 


42 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 


tually  to  support  the  authority  of  the  British  laws  and  government, 
and  discourage  all  future  groundless  pretensions  to  the  British 
crown  ?  Yet  the  king  of  France  could  plead  no  perfect  obedience 
to  the  British  laws.  Even  the  sinner  himself,  but  upon  the  sup- 
position of  the  infinite  evil  of  sin,  could  by  his  own  sufferings 
atone  for  his  sins.    Yet  he  could  not  exhibit  a  perfect  obedience. 

Beside  ;  if  the  bare  obedience  of  Christ  have  made  atonement, 
why  could  not  the  repentance  and  perfect  obedience  of  Christ's 
people  themselves,  have  answered,  instead  of  the  obedience  of 
Christ  ?  Doubtless  if  they  had  suffered  the  penalty  of  the  divine 
law,  it  would  have  answered  to  support  the  authority  of  the  law, 
and  the  vigor  of  the  divine  government,  as  really  as" the  death  of 
Christ.  And  since  the  eternal  sufferings  of  the  people  of  Christ, 
would  have  answered  the  same  end  of  supporting  the  authority  of 
the  law,  as  the  sufferings  of  Christ ;  why  would  not  the  eternal 
perfect  repentance  and  obedience  of  the  people  of  Christ,  have 
answered  the  same  end,  as  his  obedience  in  their  behalf?  If  it 
would,  both  the  death  and  obedience  of  Christ  as  our  substitute, 
are  entirely  in  vain.  If  the  elect  had  only  been  converted,  and 
made  perfectly  and  perseveringly  obedient,  it  would  have  an- 
swered every  purpose  both  of  the  death  and  obedience  of  Christ. 
Or  if  the  obedience  of  Christ  in  the  flesh  were  at  all  necessary,  it 
was  not  necessary  to  support  the  authority  of  the  law  and  gov- 
ernment of  God  ;  but  merely  as  it  was  most  wise,  that  he  should 
obey.  It  was  necessary  in  the  same  sense  only,  as  that  the  wind 
should,  at  this  moment,  blow  from  the  north-east,  and  not  from 
the  south-west,  or  from  any  other  quarter. 

If  the  mere  active  obedience  of  Christ  could  have  made  atone- 
ment for  sin,  it  may  be  difficult  to  account  for  the  punishment  of 
any  sinners.  If  obedience  without  any  demonstration  of  divine 
displeasure  at  sin,  will  answer  every  purpose  of  the  divine  authori- 
ty and  government,  in  some  instances,  why  not  in  all  instances? 
And  if  the  obedience  of  sinners  themselves  will  answer  as  really 
as  that  of  Christ,  why  might  not  all  men  have  been  led  by  divine 
grace  to  repentance,  and  perfect  subsequent  obedience,  and  in 
that  way  been  saved  from  the  curse  of  the  law  ?  Doubtless  they 
might ;  nor  was  there  originally,  nor  is  there  now,  without  any 
consideration  of  the  atonement  of  Christ,  any  other  necessity  of 
the  punishment  of  any  of  mankind  according  to  the  law,  than 
that  which  results  from  mere  sovereign  wisdom  ;  in  which  sense 
indeed  it  was  necessary  that  Christ  should  be  given  to  be  the  Sa- 
vior of  sinners,  that  Paul  should  be  saved,  and  that  every  other 
event  should  take  place,  just  as  it  does  take  place.* 

*  Nor  could  it  be  reconciled  with  justice,  and  so  not  with  wisdom.     If 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  43 

3.  From  our  doctrine  we  also  learn  the  great  gain  which  ac- 
crues to  the  universe  by  the  death  of  Christ.  It  hath  been  ob- 
jected to  the  idea  of  atonement  now  exhibited,  that  if  the  death 
of  Christ  be  an  equivalent  to  the  curse  of  the  law,  which  was  to 
have  been  inflicted  on  all  his  people,  then  there  is  on  the  whole 
no  gain,  no  advantage  to  the  universe;  that  all  that  punishment 
from  which  christians  are  saved,  hath  been  suifered  by  Christ, 
and  therefore  that  there  is  just  as  much  misery  and  no  more  hap- 
piness, than  there  would  have  been,  had  Christ  not  died.  To 
this  I  answer: 

(1)  That  it  is  not  true,  that  Christ  endured  an  equal  quantity 
of  misery,  to  that  which  would  have  been  endured  by  all  his  peo- 
ple, had  they  suffered  the  curse  of  the  law.  This  was  not  neces- 
sary on  account  of  the  infinite  dignity  of  his  person.  If  a  king 
were  to  condemn  his  son  to  lose  an  ear  or  a  hand,  it  would  doubt- 
less be  esteemed  by  all  his  subjects,  a  proof  of  far  greater  displea- 
sure in  the  king,  than  if  he  should  order  some  mean  criminal  to 
the  gallows ;  and  it  would  tend  more  effectually  to  support  the 
authority  of  the  law,  for  the  violation  of  which  this  punishment 
should  be  inflicted  on  the  prince. 

(2)  That  if  it  were  true,  that  Christ  endured  the  very  same 
quantity  of  misery,  which  was  due  to  all  his  people ;  still  by  his 
death  an  infinite  gain  accrues  to  the  universe.  For  though  the 
misery,  on  this  supposition,  is  in  both  cases  the  same,  and  bal- 
ances itself;  yet  the  positive  happiness  obtained  by  the  death  of 
Christ,  infinitely  exceeds  that  which  was  lost  by  Christ.  As  the 
eternal  Logos  was  capable  of  neither  enduring  misery,  nor  losing 
happiness,  all  the  happiness  lost  by  the  substitution  of  Christ,  was 
barely  that  of  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  during  only  thirty-three 
years  ;  or  rather  during  the  three  last  years  of  his  life  ;  because  it 
does  not  appear,  but  that  during  the  rest  of  his  life  he  was  as  hap- 
py as  men  in  general,  and  enjoyed  as  much  or  more  good,  than 
he  suffered  evil.  But  the  happiness  gained  by  the  substitution 
of  Christ,  is  that  of  a  great  multitude,  which  no  man  can  number, 
of  all  nations,  kindreds,  and  people  and  tongues.  Now  if  the 
happiness  of  one  man  for  three  years,  or  at  most  for  thirty-three 

they,  by  perfect  subsequent  obedience  had  atoned  for  their  sins,  then  to 
save  them  would  be  no  more  tlian  to  treat  them  according  to  their  own 
characters  ;  and  to  insist  on  another  mode  of  salvation,  more  expensive  and 
complicated,  cannot  be  reconciled  with  justice  or  wisdom.  And  punish- 
ment was  not  threatened  in  order  to  support  the  authority  of  the  law,  as 
that  authority  might  as  well  have  been  supported  by  mere  obedience  ;  and 
it  might  have  been  declared  in  the  law,  that  if  any  should  transgress  they 
should  be  brought  to  perfect  obedience  and  holiness  ;  and  beyond  this,  no 
other  threatening  was  necessary. 


44  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

years,  be  equal  to  that  of  an  innumerable  multitude  throughout 
eternity,  with  the  addition  of  the  greater  happiness,  which  Christ 
himself  must  enjoy  now  that  he  has  brought  so  many  sons  to 
glory,  beyond  what  he  would  have  enjoyed,  if  all  these  had  been 
plunged  in  inconceivable  and  endless  misery  ;  then  it  may  be 
justly  said,  on  the  present  hypothesis,  that  by  the  substitution  of 
Christ,  no  advantage  is  gained  to  the  universe.  But  if  the  latter 
infinitely  exceed  the  former,  the  gain  to  the  universe,  even  on 
the  supposition,  that  the  sufferings  of  Christ  were  equal  to  those, 
to  which  all  his  people  were  exposed,  is  infinite. 

4.  I  may  also  hence  take  occasion  to  oppose  an  opinion  which 
appears  to  me  erroneous  ;  which  is.  That  the  perfect  obedience 
of  Christ  was  in  a  great  measure  designed,  to  show  us,  that  the 
divine  law  may  be  obeyed  by  men.  It  shows  indeed,  that  it 
may  be  obeyed  by  a  man  in  personal  union  with  the  divine  na- 
ture. But  how  does  this  show,  that  it  may  be  obeyed  by  a  mere 
man  ?  If  we  should  also  allow,  that  it  shows,  that  the  law  may 
be  obeyed  by  a  man  born  into  the  world  in  perfect  innocence,  and 
who  is  not  a  fallen  creature  ;  yet  how  does  this  prove,  that  it  may 
be  obeyed  by  a  fallen  creature,  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins  ?  It 
is  an  undoubted  truth,  that  there  is  no  inability  in  men  to  obey 
the  law,  except  that  which  is  of  a  moral  nature,  consisting  in  the 
disinclination  or  disaffection  of  their  own  hearts  ;  which  does  not 
in  the  least  excuse  them  in  their  disobedience.  But  this  is  man- 
ifest by  other  considerations,  than  the  perfect  obedience  of  Christ ; 
if  it  were  not,  it  would  not  be  manifest  at  all. 

5.  Another  remark  which  naturally  offers  itself  in  discoursing 
on  this  subject  is,  that  Christ's  obedience  of  the  precepts  of  the 
law,  without  submitting  to  the  curse,  would  by  no  means  prove 
the  justice  of  that  curse.  This  is  the  idea  of  some  :  That  God 
sent  his  Son  into  the  world,  to  obey  the  precepts  of  the  law,  and 
that  his  mere  obedience  of  these,  proves  the  justice  both  of  the 
precepts  and  of  the  penalty  of  the  law.  I  have  already  given  the 
reasons  by  which  I  am  made  to  believe,  that  the  obedience  of 
Christ  does  not  prove  the  precepts  of  the  law  to  be  just.  But  if 
it  did  prove  the  precepts  to  be  just,  it  would  not  therefore  prove 
the  penalty  too  to  be  just.  As  tlie  precept  of  any  law  may  be 
just  and  reasonable,  yet  may  be  enforced  by  a  penalty  which  is 
unjust  and  cruel ;  so  the  proof  that  the  precept  is  just,  does  not 
at  all  prove,  but  that  the  penalty  may  be  unjust  and  cruel.  In- 
deed as  the  penalty  of  any  law  is  designed  to  support  and  enforce 
the  precept  of  that  law,  so  to  prove  the  justice  of  the  penalty, 
proves  the  justice  of  the  precept ;  because  not  the  slightest  pen- 
alty can  be  just,  when  applied  to  enforce  an  unjust  precept.    But 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  45 

this  rule  when  inverted,  doth  not  hold  good.  To  prove  the  jus- 
tice of  a  precept,  does  by  no  means  prove  the  justice  of  the  pen- 
alty by  which  that  precept  is  enforced.  So  that  if  Christ  have 
proved  the  precepts  of  the  divine  law  to  be  just,  this  by  no  means 
proves  the  justice  of  its  penalty.  On  the  other  hand,  if  Christ 
came  to  prove  the  justice  of  the  law,  and  all  that  he  has  done  to 
this  effect,  have  an  immediate  reference  to  the  precepts  only  ; 
and  if  he  have  done  notiiing  to  establish  the  justice  of  the  penal 
part,  considered  by  itself ;  the  aspect  of  the  whole  will  be,  that 
the  penal  part  is  unjustifiable,  and  that  for  this  reason  he  did  not 
pretend  to  justify  it. 

6.  The  subject  which  hath  been  under  our  consideration,  also 
shows  us,  in  what  sense  the  sufferings  of  Christ  were  agreeable 
to  God.  It  has  been  said,  that  it  is  incredible,  that  mei'e  pain 
should  be  agreeable  to  a  God  of  infinite  goodness ;  that  there- 
fore the  sufferings  of  Christ  were  agreeable  to  God  only  as  a  proof 
of  the  strength  of  the  virtue  of  Christ,  or  of  his  disposition  to 
obey  the  divine  law.  If  by  mere  pain  be  meant  pain  abstracted 
from  the  obedience  of  Christ,  I  cannot  see  why  it  may  not  be 

agreeable  to  God.  It  certainly  is,  in  the  damned ;  and  for  the 
same  reason  might  have  been,  and  doubtless  was,  in  the  case  of 
our  Lord.  The  father  was  pleased  with  the  pains  of  his  son,  as 
they  were  necessary  to  support  the  authority  of  his  law  and  gov- 
ernment, in  the  salvation  of  sinners. 

7.  Another  reflection  naturally  suggested  by  this  subject  is, 
that  in  punishing  some  sinners  according  to  the  curse  of  the  law, 
and  in  requiring  an  adequate  atonement,  in  order  to  the  salvation 
of  others ;  God  acts,  not  from  any  contracted,  selfish  motives, 
but  from  the  most  noble  benevolence  and  regard  to  the  public 
good.  It  hath  often  and  long  since  been  made  a  matter  of  ob- 
jection to  the  doctrines  of  the  future  punishment  of  the  wicked, 
and  of  the  atonement  of  Christ ;  that  they  represent  the  Deity  as 
having  regard  merely  to  his  own  honor  and  dignity,  and  not  to 
the  good  of  his  creatures,  and  therefore  represent  him  as  deficient 
in  goodness.  But  can  it  be  pretended  to  be  a  proof  of  goodness 
in  God,  to  suffer  his  own  law,  which  is  the  perfect  rule  of  virtue, 
to  fall  into  contempt  ?  However  it  might  afford  relief  to  some 
individuals,  if  God  were  to  suffer  his  moral  kingdom  to  be  dis- 
solved ;  can  it  be  for  the  general  good  of  the  system  of  his  crea- 
tures ?  Is  it  not  manifestly  necessary  to  the  general  good  of 
the  created  system,  that  God's  moral  kingdom  be  upholden  ? 
and  that  therefore  the  authority  of  the  divine  law,  and  vigor 
of  the  divine  government  be  maintained  ?     If  so,  then  it  is  al- 

VoL.II.  5 


46  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

SO  necessary  to  the  general  good,  that  punishments  be  inflicted 
on  the  disobedient  and  lawless  ;  or  that  they  be  pardoned  in  con- 
sequence only  of  a  proper  satisfaction  or  atonement. 

So  that  those  very  doctrines  which  of  all  are  made  matter  of 
the  most  objection  to  the  divine  goodness  or  benevolence,  are 
clear  proofs  of  goodness,  and  are  absolutely  necessary  to  it.  If 
a  prince  should  either  make  no  laws  for  the  government  of  his 
subjects,  or  should  never  execute  them,  but  should  suffer  all 
crimes  to  pass  with  impunity  ;  you  would  by  no  means  esteem 
him  a  good  prince,  aiming  at  the  good  of  his  subjects  ;  you  would 
not  hesitate  to  pronounce  him  either  very  weak  or  very  wicked. 

8.  In  reflecting  on  this  subject,  we  may  also  notice  the  rea- 
son, why  so  many,  who  profess  to  be  advocates  for  the  doctrine 
of  atonement,  yet  place  the  atonement  in  that,  in  which  it  does 
by  no  means  consist.  The  principal  reason  seems  to  be,  that 
they  have  conceived,  that  the  idea  of  Christ's  having  suffered  an 
equivalent  to  the  punishment,  to  which  all  his  people  were  ex- 
posed, is  inconsistent  with  grace  in  their  pardon.  But  if  I  have 
properly  stated  the  ideas  of  justice  and  grace,  it  appears  that 
there  is  as  much  grace  in  the  pardon  of  sinners  on  account  of 
such  an  atonement  as  that  just  mentioned,  as  there  would  be  on 
account  of  an  atonement  consisting  in  mere  obedience  ;  or  as 
there  would  be  in  pardon  without  any  atonement  at  all. 

9.  Hence  also  we  see,  that  the  death  of  Christ  in  our  stead, 
is  not  useless  or  in  vain.  The  opposers  of  Christ's  substitution 
and  atonement,  assert,  that  no  good  end  is  answered  by  the  suf- 
ferings of  an  innocent,  amiable,  and  virtuous  person,  in  the  stead 
of  the  guilty.  But  surely  to  support  the  authority  of  the  law  and 
of  the  moral  government  of  God,  is  not  a  vain  or  unimportant 
end.  It  was  not  in  vain  that  Zaleucus,  having  made  a  law,  that 
all  adulterers  should  have  both  their  eyes  put  out,  and  his  own 
son  being  the  first  who  transgressed,  put  out  one  of  his  own  eyes 
and  one  of  his  son's.  Hereby  he  spared  his  son  in  part,  and  yet 
as  effectually  supported  the  authority  of  his  law,  as  if  it  had  been 
Uterally  executed.  Nor  was  it  in  vain,  that  during  the  late  war, 
a  soldier  in  the  American  army  of  a  robust  constitution,  pitying 
his  fellow-soldier  of  a  slender  constitution,  who  was  condemned 
to  receive  a  certain  number  of  stripes,  petitioned  to  be  put  in  the 
place  of  the  criminal,  and  actually  received  the  stripes.  For  the 
authority  of  the  martial  law  was  effectually  supported,  and  per- 
haps by  this  means,  the  life  or  future  health  and  service  of  the 
criminal  were  preserved,  and  would  otherwise  have  been  lost. 

Neither  was  the  death  of  Christ  in  the  stead  of  sinners,  any  in- 
jury done  to  an  innocent  person.     As  well  may  we  say,  that  Za- 


SEBMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  47 

leucus,  or  the  soldier  just  mentioned,  was  injured  ;  or  that  a  man 
is  injured,  when  another  man  receives  the  money  of  him,  which 
he  vohintarily  tenders  in  payment  of  the  debt  of  a  third  person  ; 
or  that  a  man  is  injured  by  the  surgeon,  who  takes  off  his  leg  to 
preserve  his  life,  though  the  man  himself  consents,  and  desires 
him  so  to  do. 

10.  Again  ;  we  may  observe  in  what  sense  justice  and  the  di- 
vine law  are  satisfied  by  the  death  of  Christ ;  and  in  what  sense 
the  atonement  of  Christ  is  properly  called  a  satisfaction.  It  is 
only  the  third  kind  of  justice  before  mentioned,  that  is  satisfied 
by  Christ.  No  man,  for  the  reasons  already  given,  will  pretend 
that  commutative  justice  is  satisfied  by  Christ ;  for  the  contro- 
versy between  God  and  the  sinner  is  not  concerning  property. 
Nor  is  distributive  justice  satisfied.  If  it  were,  there  would  in- 
deed be  no  more  grace  in  the  discharge  of  the  sinner,  than  there 
is  in  the  discharge  of  a  criminal,  when  he  hath  endured  the  full 
punishment,  to  which  according  to  law,  he  hath  been  condemned. 
If  distributive  justice  were  satisfied,  it  would  have  no  further 
claim  on  the  sinner.  And  to  punish  him,  when  this  kind  of  jus- 
tice has  no  claim  upon  him,  is  to  treat  him  more  unfavorably  or 
severely  than  his  personal  character  deserves.  If  distributive 
justice  be  satisfied,  the  penitent  believer,  considered  in  his  own 
person,  deserves  even  according  to  the  strictness  of  the  divine 
law,  no  punishment ;  and  that  merely  because  he  repents  and 
believes  ;  and  if  so,  repentance  and  faith  satisfy  the  law,  or  are 
the  curse  of  it,  as  I  have  already  shown.  If  distributive  justice 
be  satisfied,  it  admits  of  no  further  punishment,  and  to  punish 
the  individual  further,  would  be  as  positively  unjust,  as  to  con- 
tinue a  man's  punishment,  after  he  hath  endured  the  full  penalty 
of  any  law.  If  distributive  justice  be  satisfied  by  Christ,  in  the 
behalf  of  sinners,  then  the  rule  of  distributive  justice  is  not  the 
personal  character  of  a  man,  but  the  character  of  his  friend,  his 
advocate,  or  representative ;  and  any  man  has  a  right,  on  the 
footing  of  distributive  justice,  to  be  treated  according  to  the 
character  of  his  friend  or  representative.  Therefore  if  a  subject 
rebel  against  his  sovereign,  and  procure  a  man  of  a  most  unex- 
ceptionable and  amiable  character,  to  represent  him  and  plead 
his  cause  before  his  sovereign,  he  has  a  right  on  the  footing  of 
distributive  justice,  to  be  treated  according  to  the  character  of  his 
representative  ;  and  if  he  be  not  thus  treated,  he  suflTers  an  injury  ; 
he  is  abused.  On  this  principle,  no  prince  or  magistrate  will  have 
a  right  to  punish,  for  any  crime,  a  subject  who  can  procure  a  man 
of  a  virtuous  life,  to  represent  him  and  plead  his  cause. 

But  perhaps  it  will  be  said,  that  distributive  justice  is  satisfied 


48  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

by  the  death  of  Christ,  because  he  placed  himself  in  our  stead, 
and  suffered  in  our  room  ;  and  that  whenever  a  person  thus  sub- 
stitutes himself  for  another,  and  suffers  the  punisliment  due  to 
that  other,  that  other  hath  a  right  to  a  discharge,  as  distributive 
justice  is  then  satisfied.  Now  according  to  this  objection,  the 
true  idea  of  distributive  justice  is,  to  treat  a  man  according  to  the 
sufferings  of  his  representative.  And  if  according  to  the  suffer- 
ings of  his  representative,  why  not  according  to  the  obedience  of 
his  representative.  And  this  brings  us  just  where  we  were  ;  that 
every  man  may  in  justice  demand,  to  be  treated  according  to 
the  character  of  his  representative  ;  which  is  absurd. 

Distributive  justice  therefore  is  not  at  all  satisfied  by  the  death 
of  Christ.  But  general  justice  to  the  Deity  and  to  the  universe  is 
satisfied.  That  is  done  by  the  death  of  Christ  which  supports 
the  authority  of  the  law,  and  renders  it  consistent  with  the  glory 
of  God  and  the  good  of  the  system,  to  pardon  the  sinner. 

In  the  same  sense  the  laiv  of  God  is  satisfied  by  the  death  of 
Christ ;  I  mean  as  the  divine  glory  and  the  general  good,  which 
are  the  great  ends  of  the  law,  are  secured.  In  this  sense  only  is 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  properly  called  a  satisfaction ;  God  is 
satisfied,  as  by  it  his  glory  and  the  good  of  his  system  are  secured 
and  promoted. 

Objection.  But  is  not  distributive  justice  displayed  in  the  death 
of  Christ?  Ansiver.  The  question  is  ambiguous  ;  if  the  meaning 
be,  Is  not  distributive  justice  satisfied  ?  I  answer,  for  the  reasons 
already  given,  in  the  negative.  If  the  meaning  be.  Is  there  not 
an  exhibition  made  in  the  death  and  sufferings  of  Christ,  of  the 
punishment  to  which  the  sinner  is  justly  liable  ?  I  answer  in  the 
affirmative  ;  distributive  justice  is,  in  this  sense,  displayed  in  the 
death  of  Christ.  But  it  is  no  more  displayed,  than  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner  is  displayed,  in  the  death  of  Christ. 

It  may  be  proper  here  to  notice  the  sense,  in  which  justice 
admits  of  the  salvation  of  sinners.  It  hath  been  said,  that  jus- 
tice admits  of  several  things  which  it  does  not  demand ;  that  it 
admits  of  the  salvation  of  Paul,  but  does  not  demand  it.  And  it 
would  admit  also  of  the  damnation  of  Paul,  but  does  not  demand 
that.  But  in  these  instances  the  word  justice  is  used  in  two  very 
different  senses,  which  ought  to  be  carefully  distinguished.  When 
it  is  smd  justice  admits  of  the  salvation  of  Paul,  the  third  kind  of 
justice  before  described,  must  be  intended.  The  general  good 
admits  it ;  neither  the  glory  of  God  nor  the  good  of  the  system, 
opposes  it. 

But  distributive  justice,  which  requires  every  man  to  be  treated 
according  to  his  personal  character,  does  not  admit  that  Paul 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  49 

should  be  saved.  So  far  as  this  kind  of  justice  says  anything 
concerning  this  matter,  it  demands  that  Paul  be  punished  accord- 
ing to  law.  And  if  this  justice  be  made  the  rule  of  proceeding 
in  the  case,  Paul  will  inevitably  be  cast  off.  This  kind  of  justice 
no  more  admits  of  the  salvation  of  Paul  than  it  admits  of  the  sal- 
vation of  Judas.  But  it  is  said,  that  "justice  admits  of  the  sal- 
vation of  Paul,  but  does  not  demand  it."  Justice  to  the  universe 
does  demand  it,  as  fully  as  admit  of  it,  and  the  universe  would 
suffer  an  injury,  if  he  were  not  to  be  saved ;  but  justice  to  the 
universe,  neither  demands  nor  admits  of  the  salvation  of  Judas. 
Whereas  distributive  justice  to  Paul  personally,  as  much  demands 
that  he  be  not  saved,  as  that  Judas  be  not  saved. 

But  if  we  will  make  a  distinction  between  what  justice  admits 
and  what  it  demands,  the  true  and  only  distinction  seems  to  be 
this  ;  justice  admits  of  anything  which  is  not  positively  unjust ; 
of  any  favor  however  great  or  manifold ;  whereas  it  demands 
nothing,  but  barely  what  is  just,  without  the  least  favor,  and 
which  being  refused,  positive  injustice  would  be  done.  Distribu- 
tive justice  then  admits  of  the  salvation  of  Judas  or  of  any  other 
sinner ;  as,  surely,  no  injustice  would  be  done  Judas  in  his  sal- 
vation ;  but  it  demands  not  this,  as  it  is  a  mere  favor,  or  some- 
thing beyond  the  bounds  of  mere  justice  ;  or  it  is  no  injury  to 
Judas,  that  he  is  not  saved.  Neither  does  distributive  justice  de- 
mand the  salvation  of  Paul.  But  public  justice  both  admits  and 
demands  both  the  salvation  of  Paul  and  the  damnation  of  Judas. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  neither  admits  nor  demands  the  damnation 
of  Paul,  nor  the  salvation  of  Judas.  But  distributive  justice, 
(according  to  the  present  distinction  between  the  meaning  of  the 
words  admit,  and  demand,)  though  it  admits  both  of  the  salva- 
tion and  damnation  of  both  Paul  and  Judas ;  yet  demands  nei- 
ther the  salvation  nor  damnation  of  one  or  the  other.  Or,  to 
express  the  same  thing  in  other  words ;  no  injustice  would  be 
done  either  to  Paul  or  Judas  personally,  if  they  were  both  saved 
or  both  damned.  Distributive  justice  never  demands  the  pun- 
ishment of  any  criminal,  in  any  instance  ;  because  no  injury 
would  be  done  him,  if  he  were  graciously  pardoned.  It  demands 
only  that  a  man  be  not  punished  being  innocent ;  or  be  not  pun- 
ished beyond  his  demerit ;  and  that  he  be  rewarded  according  to 
his  positive  merit. 

These  observations  may  help  us  to  understand  a  distinction, 
which  to  many  has  appeared  groundless  or  perplexing  ;  I  mean 
the  distinction  of  the  merit  of  condignity  and  merit  of  congru- 
ity.     Merit  of  both  these  kinds  refers  to  rewards  only,  and  has 

5* 


50  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEJnSNT. 

no  reference  to  punishments  ;  and  that  is  deserved  by  a  merit  of 
condignity  which  cannot  be  vvithholden  without  positive  injury. 
That  is  deserved  by  a  merit  of  congruity  which  is  a  proper  ex-  . 
pression  of  the  sense  which  the  person  rewarding,  has  of  the  mo- 
ral excellency  of  the  person  rewarded  ;  which  however  may  be 
withholden  without  positive  injury.  Of  the  former  kind  is  the 
merit  which  every  good  and  faithful  citizen  has,  of  protection  in 
his  person,  liberty  and  property,  and  the  merit  of  a  laborer  who 
has  earned  his  wages.  These  cannot  be  withholden  without  pos- 
itive injury.  Of  the  latter  kind  is  the  merit,  which  some  emi- 
nently wise  and  virtuous  citizens  have,  of  distinguishing  honors 
or  marks  of  esteem.  If  these  be  withholden,  the  proper  objects 
of  them,  may  indeed  be  said  to  be  neglected,  but  not  positively 
injured. 

11.  This  subject  teaches  also,  in  what  sense  God  was  under 
obligation  to  accept,  on  the  behalf  of  the  sinner,  the  mediation 
and  atonement  of  Christ.  It  hath  been  said,  that  when  Christ 
offered  to  make  atonement  for  sinners,  God  was  under  the  same 
obligation  to  accept  the  offer,  as  a  creditor  is  to  accept  the  pro- 
posal of  any  man,  who  offers  to  pay  the  debt  of  another.  This 
is  not  true  ;  because  in  matters  of  property,  all  that  a  creditor 
hath  a  right  to,  is  his  property.  This  being  offered  him,  by 
whomsoever  the  offer  be  made,  he  has  the  offer  of  his  right ;  and 
if  he  demand  more,  he  exceeds  his  right  ;  and  he  has  no  more 
right  to  refuse  to  give  up  the  obligation,  on  the  offer  of  a  third 
person  to  pay  the  debt,  than  to  refuse  the  same,  when  the  same 
offer  is  made  by  the  debtor  himself.  All  will  own,  that  if  a  cred- 
itor were  to  refuse  to  receive  payment,  and  give  up  the  obliga- 
tion, when  the  debtor  offers  payment,  it  would  be  abusive  and 
unjust ;  and  let  any  man  assign  a  reason  why  it  is  not  equally 
abusive  and  unjust,  not  to  receive  the  payment,  and  to  give  up 
the  obligation,  when  payment  is  offered  by  a  third  person. 

But  it  is  quite  otherwise  in  atoning  for  crimes,  in  which  dis- 
tributive, not  commutative  justice  is  concerned.  As  the  rule  of 
distributive  justice  is  the  personal  character  of  the  person  to  be 
rewarded  or  punished,  and  not  property  ;  if  a  magistrate  refuse 
to  accept  any  substitute,  and  insist  on  punishing  the  criminal 
himself,  he  treats  him  no  otherwise,  than  according  to  his  person- 
al character,  and  the  criminal  suffers  no  injustice  or  abuse.  Nor 
is  the  magistrate  under  any  obligation  of  distributive  justice,  or 
justice  to  the  criminal  himself,  to  accept  a  substitute.  It  is  true, 
that  the  circumstances  of  the  case  may  be  such,  that  it  may  be 
most  conducive  to  the  public  good,  that  the  offered  substitute  be 


SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT.  51 

accepted ;  in  this  case  wisdom  and  goodness  or  public  justice 
will  require  that  it  be  accepted,  and  the  criminal  discharged. 

This  leads  me  to  observe,  that  it  hath  also  been  said  that  when 
Christ  offered  to  become  a  substitute,  and  to  make  atonement  for 
sinners,  God  was  under  no  obligation  to  accept  the  proposal. 
This,  I  conceive,  is  as  wide  of  the  truth,  as  that  he  was  under 
the  same  obligation  to  accept  the  proposal,  as  a  creditor  is  to  ac- 
cept the  proposal  of  a  third  person  to  pay  the  debt  of  his  friend. 
The  truth  is.  The  glory  of  God  and  the  greatest  good  of  the  moral .: 
system,  did  require,  that  Christ  should  become  a  substitute  for' 
sinners ;  and  that  his  offered  substitution  should  be  accepted  by 
God.  This  was  dictated  and  recommended  by  both  wisdom  and 
goodness.  So  far  therefore  as  wisdom  and  goodness  could  infer 
an  obligation  on  the  father,  to  accept  the  substitution  of  his  son, 
he  was  under  obligation  to  accept  it.  But  this  obligation  was 
only  that  of  the  third  kind  of  justice  before  explained,  a  regard 
to  the  general  good. 

12.  This  subject  further  teaches  us,  that  that  constitution  which 
requires  an  atonement,  in  order  to  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  is 
nothing  arbitrary.  That  divine  constitution  which  is  wise  and 
good,  as  being  necessary  to  the  good  of  the  moral  system,  is  not 
arbitrary.  But  if  an  atonement  was  necessary,  in  order  to  sup- 
port the  authority  of  the  divine  law,  and  the  honor,  vigor  and 
even  existence  of  the  divine  moral  government,  while  sinners  are 
pardoned  ;  undoubtedly  that  constitution  which  requires  an  atone- 
ment, in  order  to  the  pardon  of  the  sinner,  is  the  dictate  of  wis- 
dom and  goodness,  and  by  no  means,  of  an  arbitrary  spirit. 

1.3.  Hence  we  also  learn  in  what  sense  the  death  of  Christ 
renders  God  propitious  to  sinners.  It  does  so  only  as  it  supports 
the  authority  of  his  law  and  government,  and  renders  the  pardon 
of  sinners  consistent  with  the  good  of  the  system,  and  the  glory 
of  God. 

Finally  ;  this  subject  teaches  the  groundlessness  of  that  objec- 
tion to  the  doctrine  of  atonement,  that  it  represents  the  Deity  as 
inexorable.  If  to  refuse  to  pardon  sinners  unless  it  be  in  a  way 
which  is  consistent  with  the  good  of  the  moral  system,  is  to  be 
inexorable  ;  then  that  God  will  not  pardon  sinners  without  atone- 
ment, or  in  a  way  which  is  inconsistent  with  the  authority  of  his 
law,  and  with  the  authority  and  even  existence  of  his  moral  gov- 
ernment is  indeed  a  proof,  that  God  is  inexorable.  But  if  it  be 
not  an  instance  of  inexorability,  that  God  will  not  pardon  sinners, 
unless  it  be  in  a  way  whicn  is  consistent  with  the  good  of  the 
moral  system,  there  is  no  ground  to  object  to  the  doctrine  of 


52  SERMONS  ON  THE  ATONEMENT. 

atonement,  that  it  represents  the  Deity  as  inexorable.  On  the 
other  hand,  that  God  requires  an  atonement  in  order  to  pardon, 
is  an  instance  and  proof  of  truly  divine  goodness  ;  and  if  he  were 
to  pardon  without  an  atonement,  it  would  prove,  that  he  is  des- 
titute of  goodness  and  regardless,  not  only  of  his  own  glory,  but 
of  the  true  happiness  of  the  system  of  his  moral  creatures. 


SERMON  IV. 


THE  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH,  THE  END  OF 
PREACHING.* 

2  Corinthians  4  :  2. — But  have  renounced  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty,  not 
tvalking  in  craftiness,  nor  handling  the  word  of  God  deceitfully ;  but  by  man- 
ifestation of  the  truth,  commending  ourselves  to  every  man^s  conscience  in  the 
sight  of  God. 

In  the  preceding  chapter  the  apostle  is  describing  the  excellen- 
cy of  the  gospel.  He  compares  it  with  the  law  ;  and  though  he 
allows  that  that  was  glorious,  yet  he  asserts  that  the  gospel  ex- 
ceeds in  glory.  This  is  the  glorious  gospel  which  was  committed 
to  Paul  and  the  other  apostles.  Hence  he  begins  this  chapter  in 
the  manner  he  does :  "  Therefore  seeing  we  have  this  ministry, 
as  we  have  received  mercy  we  faint  not."  As  if  he  had  said, 
Since  we  have  so  glorious  a  gospel  to  preach,  we  faint  not  in 
preaching,  defending,  and  propagating  it  ;  but  under  all  persecu- 
tions, we  persevere  in  this  work.  Nor  is  that  all ;  but  we  have 
preached  and  propagated  the  gospel  with  integrity  or  honesty, 
not  practising,  in  the  prosecution  of  our  ministry,  any  dishonest 
or  shameful  arts.  The  word  rendered  dishonesty,  more  proper- 
ly means  shame  ;  and  indeed  all  dishonest,  crafty,  deceitful  arts, 
are  truly  shameful ;  especially  in  a  minister  of  the  simple  gospel. 

As  the  several  expressions  of  dishonesty,  craftiness,  deceit,  are 
but  exegetical  of  each  other,  they  need  not  be  considered  distinct- 
ly ;  the  sum  of  what  is  intended  by  them  all  is  included  in  the 
hidden  things  of  dishonesty  or  shame. — I  shall  therefore, 

I.  Mention  some  of  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  probably 
intended  in  the  text. 

n.  Inquire  what  it  is  so  to  manifest  the  truth,  as  to  commend 
ourselves  to  the  consciences  of  men. 

III.  Show  that  such  manifestation  of  the  truth  is  the  proper 
and  immediate  end  of  preaching  the  gospel. 

*  Preached  November  5,  1783,  at  the  ordination  of  the  Reverend  Mr. 
Timothy  Dwight,  to  the  pastoral  office  over  the  church  in  Greenfield ;  and 
published  at  New  Haven. 


54  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

I.  I  am  to  mention  some  of  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty, 
probably  intended  by  the  apostle  in  our  text. 

These  comprehend  all  the  deceitful,  covert,  underhand  prac- 
tices, into  which  a  minister  may  fall. 

1.  One  of  these  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  is,  to  keep  back 
a  part  at  least  of  the  truth,  when  it  is  necessary  or  profitable, 
that  the  whole,  or  that  part,  should  be  made  known.  This  is 
sometimes  done  in  order  to  avoid  offence.  The  truth  is  often 
extremely  unpopular  ;  or  at  least  displeasing  to  a  number.  They 
find  their  own  tempers  and  practices  condemned  by  it,  and  their 
whole  characters  set  in  an  odious  point  of  light.  This  is  hard  to 
be  borne.  At  the  same  time  perhaps,  they  find  all  their  fond 
hopes  of  the  favor  of  the  Deity  in  this  life,  and  of  eternal  felicity 
in  the  life  to  come,  shaken  or  totally  overthrown  ;  and  find  them- 
selves left  in  a  state  of  painful  apprehension,  or  absolute  despair, 
as  to  their  eternal  safety.  This  is  a  state  so  disagreeable  and  in- 
tolerable, that  few  men  will  be  easy  under  that  preaching,  which 
is  the  occasion  of  it,  or  feel  a  friendly  disposition  toward  the 
preacher.  In  these  circumstances  men  will  generally  soon  grow 
uneasy,  and  whatever  professions  of  friendship  they  may  have 
made,  they  will  soon  become  his  enemies,  and  at  first  perhaps 
secretly,  afterwards  openly,  oppose  him. 

But  for  a  minister  of  the  gospel  to  make  any,  and  especially  a 
considerable  number  of  his  hearers,  and  those  perhaps  the  chief 
and  most  influential  of  his  whole  congregation,  enemies  to  him- 
self, is  extremely  undesirable.  He  naturally  wishes  to  live  in 
perfect  friendship  with  them  all,  and  therefore  to  please  them  all. 
This  is  for  his  interest,  as  well  as  for  his  tranquillity.  From 
these  sources  arises  a  very  strong  temptation  to  suppress,  in  his 
preaching,  those  truths  of  the  gospel,  which  are  unpopular,  disa- 
greeable, or  mortifying  to  the  depraved  hearts  of  mankind. 

Under  the  influence  of  this  temptation,  he  may  altogether  omit 
to  preach  some  doctrines,  though  he  really  believes  them  ;  such 
as  the  doctrines  of  God's  eternal,  absolute  and  immutable  de- 
crees ;  of  human  depravity  ;  of  the  necessity  of  regenerating  grace, 
and  the  divine  sovereignty  in  the  dispensation  of  that  grace.  Or 
if  he  do  not  totally  suppress  any  truth  ;  if  he  declare  a  part  of  it 
only,  he  may  as  really  teach  error,  as  if  he  were  directly  to  assert 
it.  For  example  :  if  he  preach  in  general  terms  the  goodness  or 
mercy  of  God,  and  explain  not  the  nature  and  object  of  it,  nor 
show  that  it  consists  in  seeking  and  promoting  the  general  good 
of  the  created  system  and  his  own  glory  ;  not  the  good  of  every 
individual,  wherein  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  general  good  ;  if  he 
say  nothing  of  the  holiness  and  justice  of  God,  which  are  indeed 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  55 

but  branches  of  the  divine  goodness,  and  which  in  a  proper  ex- 
planation of  goodness,  will  naturally  come  into  view  ;  I  say,  by 
discoursing  in  general  terms  of  the  goodness  and  mercy  of  God 
without  descending  to  proper  particulars,  a  minister  will  natural- 
ly make  his  hearers  believe,  that  God  by  his  goodness  is  seeking 
and  will  secure  the  eternal  happiness  of  every  individual  of  man- 
kind. By  this  mode  of  preaching,  thousands  have  been  brought 
into  this  belief;  this  is  the  rock  on  which  multitudes  have  split. 
This  seems  to  be  the  main  pillar  of  deism  ;  the  men  of  that  class 
groundlessly  concluding,  that  because  God  is  indeed  aiming  at 
the  good  or  happiness  of  his  creatures,  therefore  he  is  aiming  at 
the  happiness,  not  merely  of  the  system  in  general,  but  of  every 
individual.  Whereas  it  remains  to  be  proved,  that  the  greatest 
happiness  of  the  created  system  implies  the  happiness  of  every 
individual ;  and  nothing  is  more  evident,  than  that  if  God  is  aim- 
ing at  the  greatest  happiness  of  every  individual,  he  entirely  fails 
of  his  end  ;  inasmuch  as  individuals,  even  in  this  life,  are  extreme- 
ly miserable. 

Again  ;  by  dwelUng  only  on  the  sufficiency  of  gospel  grace, 
and  saying  nothing  of  the  conditions  on  which  the  promises  of 
the  gospel  are  suspended,  a  minister  may  impress  on  the  minds 
of  his  hearers,  the  idea,  that  those  promises  are  wholly  uncondi- 
tional. By  preaching  up  the  necessity  and  efficacy  of  faith,  with- 
out explaining  the  nature  of  it,  the  hearers  may  be  led  to  think, 
that  the  justifying  faith  of  the  gospel  is  a  mere  assent  of  the  un- 
derstanding, without  any  right  temper  of  heart.  By  insisting 
abundantly  on  good  works,  the  excellency  and  necessity  of  them, 
and  leaving  the  matter  thus  ;  people  may  conceive,  that  they  may 
obtain  justification  by  their  own  good  works.  These  may  serve 
as  instances  of  error  taught,  not  by  direct  and  positive  assertion ; 
but  by  a  partial  exhibition  of  the  truth ;  and  they  all  belong  to 
the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty,  or  to  the  handling  of  the  word 
of  God  deceitfully. 

2.  To  deliver  the  truth  in  general  and  equivocal  terms,  is  a 
practice  of  dishonesty,  similar  to  that  just  mentioned.  This  is 
one  way  of  suppressing  the  truth.  The  most  pungent  and  mor- 
tifying truths  will  be  tolerable,  if  delivered  in  general  terms.  In 
this  case,  every  man  may  understand  and  receive  it,  in  a  manner 
agreeable  to  his  own  taste  or  wishes.  But  should  the  preacher 
explain  himself  and  descend  to  some  particulars,  he  would  no 
doubt  offend  some,  and  perhaps  all  his  hearers.  By  the  use  of 
only  general  terms,  the  real  truth  is  kept  out  of  sight.  Thus  a 
man  may  preach,  in  general  terms,  the  sovereignty  of  God,  and 
say  nothing  but  the  truth  on  this  subject ;  yet  his  hearers  shall 


56  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH. 

not  know  whether  he  mean  a  sovereignty  over  the  natural,  or 
over  the  moral  world  ;  a  sovereignty  in  ruling  the  sun,  moon  and 
stars,  or  in  ruling  the  hearts  of  men.  Or  if  the  preacher  speak 
expressly  of  God's  sovereignty  in  the  moral  world,  still  it  may 
not  be  clear,  whether  he  intend  merely  a  sovereignty  in  ruling 
the  nations  and  kingdoms  of  the  world,  or  in  ruling  individuals. 
Or  again  ;  if  he  shall  explain  himself  so  far,  that  it  shall  appear, 
that  he  means  a  sovereignty  over  individuals,  still  it  may  be  doubt- 
ful, whether  he  would  teach  a  sovereignty  which  is  absolute  and 
efficacious,  or  .one  that  is  merely  suasive,  and  efficacious  only  so 
far  as  men  will  be  drawn  by  arguments  and  motives. 

Again  ;  a  preacher  may  say  much  of  the  depravity  of  the  hu- 
man heart ;  nay,  may  declare  it  to  be  universal,  affecting  every 
faculty  of  the  human  mind  ;  yet  he  may  never  teach  that  this 
depravity  is  entire  and  total,  and  his  hearers  may  never  know 
what  his  ideas  are  as  to  this  point.  He  may  say  much  of  regen- 
eration, and  of  the  grace  of  God  in  it ;  yet  it  may  never  be  dis- 
cernible by  his  preaching,  whether  he  suppose  it  to  be  wrought 
by  the  immediate  power  and  agency  of  God,  or  by  light  and  mo- 
ral suasion.  He  may  say  much  of  justification  by  faith  ;  yet  it 
may  not  be  clear,  whether  he  means,  that  we  are  justified  by  the 
gospel,  the  object  of  our  faith  and  by  the  obedience  of  it ;  or  by 
the  exercise  of  faith  in  Christ,  and  by  his  righteousness  which  is 
apprehended  by  faith.  It  may  be  equally  uncertain,  whether  by 
justifying  faith  he  mean  a  bare  speculative  assent  of  the  under- 
standing, or  such  a  view  of  the  truth  as  implies  a  reconciliation  of 
heart ;  a  belief  that  Christ  died  for  me  in  particular,  or  a  cordial 
belief  and  reception  of  Christ  as  a  glorious  and  all  sufficient  Sa- 
vior, without  any  persuasion  tliat  I  have  already  an  interest  in 
him.  He  may  say  much  of  love  to  God,  and  to  Christ ;  but  it 
may  not  appear,  whether  this  is  to  be  exercised  on  interested  or 
disinterested  principles  ;  whether  it  must  be  a  love  of  God's  cha- 
racter, or  only  of  his  benefits.  He  may  say  much  of  repentance 
and  the  necessity  of  it ;  yet  it  may  be  altogether  uncertain, 
whether  he  would  teach  a  repentance,  which  may  be  excited 
merely  by  a  dread  of  punishment,  or  one  which  arises  from  a  heart- 
felt sense  of  the  vileness  of  sin.  He  may  say  much  of  holiness ; 
but  leave  it  in  the  dark,  whether  true  holiness  consist  in  mere  ex- 
ternal morality,  or  primarily  in  supreme  love  to  God  and  univer- 
sal love  to  men,  and  secondarily  in  that  general  obedience  which 
arises  from  his  temper  of  love. 

Thus  the  whole  system  of  divine  truth  may  be  misunderstood 
or  perverted,  by  being  exhibited  in  too  general  terms.  This  is 
general  preaching,  and  is  opposed  to  that  which  is  particular 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  57 

and  plain.  As  men  are  naturally  inclined  to  understand  divine 
truth  in  a  manner  agreeable  to  their  own  wishes  ;  there  is  on  that 
account  the  greater  danger,  that  error  will  be  received  instead  of 
truth,  and  therefore  the  greater  necessity  that  the  preacher  be 
most  plain  and  particular. 

3.  To  coincide,  in  preaching  or  discipline,  with  the  groundless 
prejudices  of  the  people,  with  regard  to  things  important,  is  another 
hidden  thing  of  dishonesty,  and  an  instance  of  walking  in  crafti- 
ness and  handling  the  word  of  God  deceitfully.  A  man  who 
midertakes  to  preach  the  gospel,  may  have  no  principles  at  all, 
or  at  most,  none  but  such  as  he  may  be  willing  to  give  up,  in  or- 
der to  serve  his  interest.  Therefore,  if  it  be  most  for  his  interest 
to  be  silent  as  to  any  particular  subject  of  doctrine  or  discipline, 
he  ivill  be  silent ;  or  concealing  his  own  belief,  he  will  preach 
according  to  that  of  his  hearers.  No  class  of  men  are  under  so 
strong  temptation  to  sacrifice  their  own  sentiments  to  others,  as 
ministers  of  the  gospel ;  especially  because  in  general  they  are  so 
dependent  on  their  people.  It  is  generally  disagreeable  to  a  man 
to  be  singular  and  to  oppose  his  neighbors,  though  he  be  entirely 
independent  of  them.  But  if  he  be  dependent  on  them  for  his 
daily  subsistence,  then  to  oppose  them,  and  openly  to  avow  sen- 
timents by  which  they  are  offended,  and  perhaps  condemned  in 
their  moral  conduct,  or  spiritual  estate ;  this  is  often  too  much 
for  frail  human  nature. 

Yet  this  must  be  done  by  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  if  he  will 
regard  either  his  duty,  his  honor,  or  a  consistency  of  character. 
Can  we  pretend  it  is  our  duty  to  give  up  evangelical  truth,  on 
which  the  salvation  of  the  souls  of  men  depends,  or  to  keep  it 
out  of  sight,  and  to  preach  the  contrary  errors,  which  may  lead 
them  to  eternal  death,  in  order  that  we  may  maintain  friendship 
with  them,  and  thus  procure  our  daily  bread  ?  Is  this  acceptable 
to  God  ?  Will  it  stand  the  scrutiny  of  him,  whose  eyes  are  as  a 
flame  of  fire  ?  Is  this  fulfilling  the  contract  which  we  have  made 
with  men  ?  They  on  their  part  contract  to  support  us,  not  that 
we  may  humor  and  flatter  them,  with  regard  to  their  spiritual 
concerns  ;  not  that  we  may  preach  errors  to  them,  even  although 
those  errors  may  be  adopted  by  themselves  ;  but  that  we  may 
preach  the  real  truths  of  the  gospel.  And  if  we  do  not  honestly 
preach  the  truth,  according  to  our  knowledge  and  understanding  ; 
I  see  not  but  that  we  practise  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty, 
grossly  violate  the  contract  into  which  we  have  entered,  and  on 
that  very  account  are  justly  amenable  to  them,  at  the  common 
human  tribunals. 

4.  Nearly  allied  to  the  foregoing  particular,  is  preaching  or 
Vol.  II.  6 


58 


MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 


undertaking  the  ministry,  for  the  sake  of  the  salary  or  the  living. 
Though  a  minister  preach  the  truth,  and  preach  it  fully  and 
clearly,  descending  to  proper  particulars  ;  yet  he  may  do  all 
chiefly  for  the  sake  of  the  temporal  reward.  It  is  at  least  to  be 
suspected,  that  some  undertake  the  ministry  from  this  motive. 
But  what  trifling  is  this  with  sacred  things  I  It  is  wholly  per- 
verting the  institution  of  the  evangelical  ministry.  Doubtless 
they  who  preach  the  gospel,  have  a  right  to  live  of  the  gospel, 
and  to  enter  on  this  business  with  this  expectation.  But  this  is 
very  different  from  entering  on  it  chiefly  from  the  motive  of  ob- 
taining a  living.  Whatever  some  may  do  in  fact,  I  presume  no 
man  would  choose  professedly  to  undertake  the  work  of  the  min- 
istry solely  or  chiefly,  that  he  may  procure  a  living.  But  why 
would  not  any  man  choose  to  profess  and  avow  this  motive  ?  Un- 
doubtedly because  he  knows  that  it  is  low  and  mercenary,  unwor- 
thy of  the  ministerial  character,  not  agreeable  to  the  mind  of  the 
Great  Author  of  this  and  all  other  institutions  of  the  gospel,  nor  to 
the  understanding  of  men  in  general,  particularly  of  those  who 
are  committed  to  his  charge  in  his  ministerial  office.  Therefore 
to  act  from  this  principle,  in  this  instance,  is  to  practise  the  hid- 
den things  of  dishonesty. 

5.  If  we  neglect  to  inquire,  to  study  and  to  search  diligently 
after  the  truth,  this  is  another  hidden  thing  of  dishonesty.  This 
neglect  sometimes  takes  place  through  indolence,  and  inconsid- 
eration  ;  sometimes  through  design. 

(1)  Through  indolence  and  inconsideration.  To  indulge  in- 
dolence and  inconsideration  in  such  important  matters  as  those 
which  relate  to  the  ministry  of  the  gospel,  certainly  belongs  to 
the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  and  shame.  For  us,  who  have 
taken  upon  ourselves  this  sacred  office,  to  be  inattentive  to  truth, 
inconsiderate  with  regard  to  the  worth  and  importance  of  it,  or 
indolent  in  our  researches  after  it,  is  not  to  act  an  honest,  and 
reputable,  but  a  dishonest  and  shameful  part.  Ministers  of  the 
gospel  are  to  be  ensamples  to  their  flocks  in  general,  and  in  the 
virtues  of  industry,  and  a  diligent  employment  of  their  time,  as 
well  as  in  all  other  virtues.  Shall  a  day-laborer,  who  is  indolent 
in  his  work,  or  careless  as  to  the  manner  in  which  he  performs  it, 
lose  all  character  and  employment?  Shall  a  tradesman,  be  for 
the  same  reason  entirely  neglected  and  discarded  ?  Yet  shall  a 
minister  of  the  gospel,  who  has  so  many  more,  and  greater,  and 
stronger  motives  and  obligations  to  exert  himself,  and  to  be  dili- 
gent in  his  work,  be  indolent,  careless  and  devoted  to  his  ease  ? 
No,  let  no  such  character  be  known  among  us.  A  man  of  this 
character  defrauds  the  people  among  whom  he  is  called  to  be 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  59 

a  minister,  not  of  their  property,  but  of  divine  truth,  the  sincere 
milk  of  the  word,  the  bread  of  life ;  he  defrauds  himself  of  the 
reward  of  a  faithful  servant  ;  he  defrauds  God  of  that  service 
which  is  his  indispensable  due  ;  he  violates  numerous  express 
precepts  of  holy  writ,  and  his  own  solemn  vows ;  he  brings  re- 
proach on  the  cause  of  Christ,  and  gives  occasion  to  the  adver- 
sary to  blaspheme. 

(2)  Sometimes,  ministers  may  neglect  to  study  and  search 
out  the  truth,  through  design.  They  choose  to  be  ignorant  of 
many  important  doctrines,  as  when  a  controversy  happens  to 
arise  concerning  those  doctrines,  their  ignorance  affords  them  an 
easy  plea  to  avoid  all  conversation  on  the  subjects,  and  conse- 
quently all  the  offence,  which  they  might  give  by  taking  a  de- 
cided part  on  either  side  of  the  question.  As  they  are  able  to 
say  that  they  are  ignorant  of  the  subject,  they  are  easily  excused 
from  giving  their  opinion,  they  offend  no  party,  and  obtain  no  ill 
name.  But  is  not  this  a  hidden  practice  of  dishonesty  ?  Is  it 
honest,  is  it  honorable  in  a  christian  minister,  thus  voluntarily  to 
remain  ignorant  of  important  christian  truth  ?  When  the  truth 
labors,  to  stand  by,  and  do  nothing  in  support  of  it  ?  and  this  only 
that  he  may  sail  easily  and  quietly  down  the  stream  of  human 
life  ;  and  be  wafted  along  by  the  fresh  gales  of  popular  applause  ? 
No,  such  a  practice  belongs  to  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty 
and  shame. 

There  are  also  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  in  discipline,  as  well 
as  in  preaching  ;  as  when  a  minister  neglects  to  preach  on  the 
subject  of  church  discipline,  to  explain  the  nature  of  it,  to  incul- 
cate the  duty  and  importance  of  it ;  when  he  connives  at  the 
faults  of  gross  offenders  ;  when  he  always  excuses  himself  from 
this  disagreeable  and  mortifying  service.  True,  it  is  most  desi- 
rable, both  in  respect  of  the  minister's  influence  and  usefulness 
among  his  people,  and  in  respect  of  his  comfort  and  leisure  for 
his  ministerial  studies  ;  that  some  of  the  brethren  bring  forward 
matters  of  discipline,  by  taking  the  previous  steps  and  by  making 
proper  complaint  to  the  church.  But  what  if  others  neglect  their 
duty  in  this  particular  ?  Is  this  matter  therefore  to  be  neglected 
by  the  minister  too?  I  think  not.  The  case  may  happen,  in 
which  it  may  be  his  duty  to  step  forward,  and  to  exhibit  an  ex- 
ample in  every  part  of  christian  discipline.  And  so  again,  it  is  a 
hidden  practice  of  dishonesty,  for  a  minister,  in  a  case  of  disci- 
pline, to  flatter  the  accused  brother,  by  conversation  or  conduct, 
and  to  make  him  believe,  that  he  himself  acts  only  of  necessity 
in  the  execution  of  his  office  ;  that  others  force  him  on,  and  that 
the  discipline  hath  been  begun  and  carried  on  contrary  to  his 


60  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

mind,  though  he  may  be  fully  convinced  that  the  accused  is  justly 
liable  to  discipline  in  the  case. 

These  are  some  of  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty  to  which 
ministers  of  the  gospel  are  liable.  The  temptation  to  these  is 
very  great,  arising  from  the  consideration  of  their  ease,  profit  and 
subsistence.  Yet  Christ  requires  them  to  take  up  the  cross  and 
follow  him.  What  if  Christ  himself  had  acted  on  these  princi- 
ples of  his  ease  and  convenience  ?  Or  what  if  his  apostles  after 
him,  and  his  ministers  in  all  ages,  had  adopted  this  line  of  con- 
duct ?  Or  what  if  they  should  now  universally  adopt  it  ?  It  is 
manifest  it  would  soon  end  in  the  general  disorder  and  confusion 
of  the  church,  and  the  general  prevalence  of  error  and  irreligion. 

II.  I  am,  as  was  proposed,  to  consider  what  it  is  so  to  man- 
ifest the  truth,  as  to  commend  ourselves  to  the  consciences  of 
men. 

It  is  to  manifest  the  truth  in  such  a  manner  as  to  obtain  the 
testimony  of  the  consciences  of  those,  to  whom  we  speak,  in  fa- 
vor of  the  truth  that  we  deliver.  The  word  here  translated 
commending,  might  well  have  been  rendered  presenting.  The 
apostles  presented  the  truth,  or  presented  themselves  in  the  mani- 
festation of  the  truth,  or  with  the  light  of  truth  shining  around 
them,  to  the  consciences  of  their  hearers  ;  and  thus  obtained  the 
testimony  of  their  consciences  in  favor  of  the  truth  which  they 
preached.  For  the  consciences  of  men  rightly  informed,  ever 
bear  a  faithful  testimony  to  the  truth.  The  conscience  is  the 
principle  in  human  nature,  by  which  the  true  preacher  of  the 
gospel  may  take  the  most  advantageous  hold  of  sinners.  He 
cannot  by  any  manifestation  of  the  truth,  convert,  or  lead  them 
to  real  repentance  ;  but  he  may  gain  the  assent  and  testimony  of 
their  consciences  in  favor  of  the  truth,  and  against  themselves  as 
sinners.  To  this  end  the  truth  must  be  manifested  fully  and 
clearly  ;  one  truth  as  well  as  another  ;  and  all  truths  in  their  pro- 
per connection  and  dependence  on  each  other.  All  divine  truth 
properly  apprehended,  is  suited  to  touch  the  conscience  ;  and  in 
order  to  this  effect,  it  needs  only  to  be  manifested  and  seen. 
But  some  modes  of  manifesting  the  truth,  are  more  advantageous 
than  others.     As, 

1.  The  most  perspicuous  mode  of  manifestation  is  always  the 
best.  Though  the  truth  be  obscurely  manifested,  it  may  be  real- 
ly manifested.  But  when  obscurely  manifested,  it  is  in  no  mea- 
sure so  likely  to  affect  the  conscience.  The  more  clear  the  ex- 
hibition we  make  of  it  is,  the  more  likely  is  it,  to  be  attended  with 
its  proper  effect ;  the  more  shall  we  commend  ourselves  to  the 
consciences  of  our  hearers. 


THE  END  or  PREACHING.  61 

2.  To  manifest  the  truth  in  an  engaging,  inviting  manner,  is 
often  of  a  happy  tendency  to  touch  the  conscience.  The  more 
the  truth  is  exhibited  in  an  engaging  and  inviting  manner,  the 
more  will  it  naturally  draw  the  attention  ;  and  the  more  the  at- 
tention is  drawn  to  the  truth,  the  greater  advantage  will  it  have 
to  take  hold  of  the  conscience.  As  the  truth  cannot  affect  the 
conscience  at  all,  unless  it  is  known  or  comes  into  view  ;  so  in 
proportion  as  it  more  engages  the  attention,  it  comes  the  more 
thoroughly  into  view ;  and  consequently,  for  the  same  reason, 
that  the  truth,  when  known  at  all,  is  more  likely  to  affect  the 
conscience,  than  when  it  is  not  known,  so  the  more  thoroughly 
it  is  known  and  attended  to,  the  greater  is  the  probability  that 
the  conscience  will  be  affected  by  it.  This  shows  the  use  and 
importance  of  a  thorough  application  of  the  powers  of  eloquence, 
and  all  the  address  of  oratory.  The  minister  of  the  gospel  may 
make  a  very  advantageous  use  of  the  most  lively  descriptions, 
the  strongest  expressions,  the  boldest  figures,  the  greatest  zeal, 
and  all  the  beauty  and  force  of  pronunciation  and  gesture. 

But  it  must  be  remembered,  that  it  is  here  taken  for  granted, 
that  by  all  these  arts  of  oratory,  the  attention  of  the  hearers  is 
attracted  to  the  truth,  and  not  to  the  speaker,  or  to  his  ingenuity 
and  address.  The  difference  between  these  two  cases,  is  very 
great  and  manifest.  If  the  attention  is  excited  and  fixed  upon 
the  truth  itself,  the  aforesaid  arts  of  oratory  are  employed  to  ex- 
cellent purpose,  and  commend  the  truth  to  the  conscience.  But 
if  they  are  employed  only  to  draw  the  attention  to  the  preacher, 
and  cause  the  hearers  to  admire  him  ;  they  are  employed  to  no 
good  purpose  at  all  ;  nay,  to  bad  purpose,  as  they  tend  to  divert 
the  attention  from  the  truth  itself,  and  therefore  do  hurt  instead 
of  good. 

3.  In  order  to  the  most  advantageous  manifestation  of  the 
truth,  we  shall  dwell  most  on  those  subjects  which  are  the  most 
important.  Though  every  truth  is  a  real  truth  ;  yet  every  truth 
is  not  of  equal  importance.  That  the  Jews  who  crucified  our 
Lord,  stripped  him  of  his  own  clothes,  and  put  a  scarlet  robe  on 
him  ;  and  that  they  platted  a  crown  of  thorns,  and  put  it  on  his 
head,  are  real  truths ;  yet  these  are  not  of  equal  importance  with 
the  death  of  Christ,  and  the  atonement  made  thereby  for  the 
sins  of  mankind  ;  or  with  the  proclamation  of  pardon  and  salva- 
tion through  faith  in  Christ.  Now  in  preaching  the  gospel,  we 
should  dwell  on  each  truth  according  to  its  importance  and  prac- 
tical influence. 

4.  It  is  very  advantageous,  in  preaching,  to  describe  the  hu- 
man heart,  and  its  affections,  according  to  real  life.     For  as  face 

6* 


62  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

answers  to  face  in  water,  so  doth  the  heart  of  man  to  man.  In 
this  mode  of  procedure,  the  preacher,  though  ignorant  of  the 
real  characters  and  tempers  of  particular  persons,  will  often  hit 
them  most  exactly  ;  so  that  they  shall  think,  that  of  design,  and 
from  a  knowledge  of  their  case,  he  hath  adapted  his  discourse 
with  a  particular  reference  to  them.  A  thorough  knowledge  of 
human  nature  in  general,  and  of  his  own  heart  in  particular,  is 
exceedingly  useful  and  necessary  for  every  minister  of  the  gospel. 

5.  It  is  also  useful  and  of  a  direct  tendency  to  touch  the  con- 
science, to  lead  men,  in  a  view  of  the  truth,  to  a  particular  ex- 
amination of  themselves.  This  often  has  a  wonderful  and  most 
happy  effect. 

6.  It  is  sometimes  useful  to  exhibit  the  truth  in  parabolical 
repj'esentations,  as  the  prophet  did  to  David,  when  he  would  con- 
vict him  of  his  sin  in  the  matter  of  Uriah.  Such  representations 
will  often  be  justly  applied  by  the  hearers  to  themselves.  Some 
times,  however,  it  is  useful  and  necessary  for  the  minister  to  ap- 
ply them,  as  the  prophet  did  to  David,  saying,  "  Thou  art  the 
man." 

III.  Such  a  manifestation  of  the  truth  as  tends  to  affect  the 
conscience,  is  the  proper  and  immediate  end  of  preaching  the 
gospel. 

If  this  is  not  the  proper  and  immediate  end  of  preaching, 
what  is  ?  Doubtless  the  chief  and  ultimate  end  is  the  salva- 
tion of  men,  in  a  way  that  is  subservient  to  the  divine  glory.  But 
how  is  this  to  be  effected  ?  Not  surely  by  pleasing  and  amusing 
mankind  ;  nor  by  flattering  and  deceiving  them  ;  but  by  instruc- 
tion and  persuasion.  Men  are  to  be  taught  the  way  to  heaven, 
and  to  be  persuaded  by  all  rational  and  scriptural  arguments  to 
walk  in  it.  They  are  to  be  both  instructed  and  persuaded  by  a 
manifestation  of  the  truth.  Nor  is  it  enough  to  furnish  men's 
minds  with  mere  speculative  knowledge  ;  the  truth  should  be 
taught  in  a  practical  view,  as  it  relates  to  practice  and  leads  to  it. 
The  truth  really  exhibited,  will  naturally  commend  itself  to  the 
conscience,  so  far  as  to  gain  its  assent  to  duty,  and  its  dissent 
from  sin  ;  to  make  it  approve  of  what  is  right,  and  condemn 
what  is  wrong.  So  far  therefore  it  both  leads  to  a  right  practice, 
and  restrains  from  a  wrong  one  ;  and  thus  happily  subserves  the 
chief  and  ultimate  end  of  preaching. 

Indeed  we  are  not  to  expect  that  the  truth  alone,  without  a 
divine  influence,  will  convert  the  soul ;  yet  as  it  will  awaken  the 
conscience,  and  these  awakenings  and  convictions  ordinarily  pre- 
cede conversion,  and  render  it  more  probable,  that  the  subject  of 
them  will  attain  to  the  true  grace  of  God  ;  in  this  sense,  the  faith- 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  63 

fal  exhibition  of  the  truth  happily  tends  to  the  great  end  of  preach- 
ing, which  is  the  salvation  of  souls  in  the  way  before  mentioned. 

The  same  manifestation  of  the  truth  tends  also  to  the  edifica- 
tion of  saints  in  faith  and  holiness.  It  tends  to  convince  them 
wherein  they  have  heretofore  sinned  and  come  short  of  their 
duty ;  points  out  to  them  their  duty  in  future  ;  and  persuades 
them  to  avoid  sin  and  practise  holiness.  In  both  these  respects 
it  tends  to  their  edification. 

It  is  by  a  faithful  exhibition  of  the  truth,  that  sinners  are  to  be 
awakened  and  led  to  repentance,  and  saints  are  to  be  edified  and 
quickened  ;  and  so  the  salvation  of  men  is  to  be  effected. 

If  the  advancement  of  true  religion  in  the  world,  is  an  end, 
and  a  great  end  of  preaching  (and  I  presume  none  will  deny  that 
it  is)  this  end  is  to  be  obtained,  only  so  far  as  the  truth  is  ex- 
hibited. True  religion  is  wholly  built  on  the  truth,  and  on  a 
knowledge  of  it ;  and  any  affections  of  a  religious  nature,  are 
only  so  far  genuine  and  virtuous,  as  they  are  built  on  a  view  of 
the  truth.  Whatever  affections  are  not  built  on  the  truth,  and 
are  not  exercised  in  the  view  of  it,  are  either  directly  opposed  to 
true  religion,  or  are  mere  wild  enthusiasm. 

Having  thus  pointed  out  some  of  the  things  of  dishonesty  in- 
tended in  the  text — having  shown  what  it  is  so  to  manifest  the 
truth  as  to  commend  ourselves  to  the  consciences  of  men — and 
also  that  such  a  manifestation  of  the  truth  is  the  proper  and  im- 
mediate end  of  preaching  the  gospel — I  now  proceed  to  apply 
this  subject,  in  particular  addresses,  first  to  the  pastor  elect,  then 
to  the  church  and  congregation  in  this  place. 

I.  To  the  pastor  elect. 

My  dear  Sir, — Permit  me  to  address  you,  on  this  solemn  occa- 
sion, with  fidelity,  with  plainness,  and  with  that  tenderness  which 
is  the  natural  effect  of  consanguinity  and  long  friendship  ;  and  may 
I  do  it  in  the  genuine  exercise  of  christian  brotherly  love  !  You 
are  now  to  be  set  apart  to  a  very  solemn  and  important  work  ;  the 
most  solemn  that  can  be  undertaken  in  the  world.  Fidelity  and 
honesty  in  this  work,  are  peremptorily  required  of  you.  You 
have  heard  in  what  manner  the  apostles  executed  this  work. 
They  renounced  the  hidden  things  of  dishonesty ;  did  not  walk 
in  craftiness,  nor  handle  the  word  of  God  deceitfully ;  but  by 
manifestation  of  the  truth  commended  themselves  to  every  man's 
conscience,  in  the  sight  of  God.  Go  thou  and  do  likewise. 
Approve  yourself  honest  and  faithful,  first  in  your  personal  con- 
cerns of  a  spiritual  nature,  and  then  in  every  part  of  your  minis- 
terial work. 

In  the  first  place,  be  honest,  careful  and  vigilant  in  your  own 


64  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

spiritual  concerns.  The  apostle  argues,  that  if  a  minister  neglect 
the  moral  concerns  of  his  own  house,  he  will  also  neglect  those 
of  the  church.  With  equal  truth  may  we  argue,  that  if  a  man 
neglect  the  spiritual  concerns  of  his  own  soul,  he  will  neglect 
those  of  his  flock,  the  people  of  his  charge.  Be  careful  therefore 
to  keep  your  own  vineyard ;  thus  will  you  become  the  better 
prepared,  to  be  a  keeper  of  the  vineyards  of  your  mother'' s  chil- 
dren ;  and  without  the  former,  you  will  in  no  measure  be  prepared 
for  the  latter.  Take  heed  that  you  maintain  a  close  walk  with 
God ;  which  primarily  consists  in  an  habitual  sense  of  his  existence, 
perfection,  glory,  constant  presence  with  you,  and  observation  of 
you  in  all  your  conduct,  especially  in  your  ministerial  work  ;  and  in 
a  sense  of  your  own  accountableness  to  him.  Maintain  a  constant 
watch  over  your  own  spirit ;  "  keep  thy  heart  with  all  diligence, 
as  out  of  it  are  the  issues  of  life."  Observe  its  affections,  tem- 
pers, motives,  and  ends,  both  in  your  religious  and  your  moral 
conduct.  Be  frequent  and  steady  in  your  private  devotions,  and 
thus  live  near  to  God.  Prayer  is  said  to  be  the  very  breath  of  the 
christian  ;  live  by  the  use  of  this  breath.  Accustom  yourself  to 
the  employment  of  the  glorified  saints,  before  you  join  them ; 
thus  will  your  conversation  be  in  heaven,  while  you  tabernacle  in 
the  flesh.  Follow  the  example  of  the  great  apostle,  in  this  respect, 
as  well  as  others,  "  that  without  ceasing  you  make  mention  "  of 
the  people  of  your  charge  "  always  in  your  prayers."  Be  careful 
not  only  to  keep  a  conscience  void  of  offence  towards  God,  but 
also  towards  men.  Beware  of  the  error  into  which  too  many  run, 
who  quiet  their  consciences,  in  a  neglect  of  the  duties  of  one 
table,  on  a  pretence  of  extraordinary  attention  to  those  of  the 
other.  Cultivate  a  spirit  of  benevolence  to  all  men,  and  even  to 
your  enemies ;  seeking  their  good,  both  spiritual  and  temporal. 
This  is  that  love  of  our  enemies,  which  is  a  peculiar  duty  of  the 
gospel.  Love,  in  its  genuine  exercises  towards  God  and  towards 
men,  is  the  very  spirit  of  the  gospel,  and  the  sum  total  of  all  that 
is  required  in  it.  So  far  as  you  have  this  spirit,  you  have  re- 
ceived of  the  fulness  of  Christ,  and  grace  for  grace  ;  and  in  im- 
bibing and  cultivating  this  spirit,  you  will  reduce  the  gospel  to 
practice,  and  exhibit  an  example  to  others  of  the  truths  and  du- 
ties, which  you  inculcate  on  them  in  your  preaching. 

But  this  is  not  all ;  you  are  not  only  to  be  thus  faithful  in 
your  private  spiritual  concerns,  as  a  christian ;  but  also  in  every 
part  of  your  ministerial  work ;  in  your  studies  and  researches 
after  the  truth — in  communicating  it  to  your  people — in  your 
common  conduct. 

First,  be  honest  and  faithful  in  your  researches  after  truth. 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  6S 

This  part  of  your  work  will  require  your  utmost  attention  and  all 
the  time  which  you  can  spare  from  other  necessary  duties.  The 
knowledge  of  the  truth  is  absolutely  necessary  for  a  minister  of 
the  gospel.  It  cannot  however  be  known  in  any  competent  de- 
gree, but  by  close  and  persevering  study.  The  more  you  know 
it,  the  greater  advantage  will  you  have  for  doing  good.  It  is 
endless,  and  can  never  be  exhausted.  The  darkness  or  obscu- 
rity resting  on  the  truth  is  very  great ;  and  every  one,  especially 
every  minister  of  the  gospel,  is  bound  to  exert  himself  to  dispel 
the  darkness  and  bring  the  truth  to  light.  If  every  one  were  to 
exert  himself  to  this  end,  doubtless  great  and  rapid  would  be  the 
increase  of  light  and  knowledge. 

Improvement  is  by  no  means  at  an  end  ;  and  those  men  err 
exceedingly,  who  lament  that  they  live  in  this  late  period  of  the 
world,  wherein  improvement  and  science  have  been  anticipated, 
and  there  is  no  room  left  for  further  discoveries.  There  is  abun- 
dant room  for  discovery  and  improvement  in  every  science, 
especially  in  theology.  If  all  truth  be  already  discovered,  whence 
arises  that  endless  variety  of  sentiments,  and  the  extreme  diffi- 
culty of  settling  controversies  on  theological  subjects  ?  These 
facts  certainly  prove,  that  all  do  not  embrace  the  truth  ;  and  if 
some  few  are  possessed  of  it  in  the  general,  yet  of  these  few  per- 
haps no  two  can  be  produced,  who  do  not  differ  in  their  appre- 
hensions and  representations  of  some  important  doctrines.  If 
therefore  improvement  in  theology  be  at  an  end,  it  is  brought  to 
an  end,  not  by  a  number  of  divines ;  for  a  number  cannot  be 
found,  who  agree  among  themselves ;  but  it  is  brought  to  an  end 
by  some  highly  favored  individual,  who  knows  more  than  all  the 
world  beside.  But  who  or  where  is  this  man  ?  Will  any  one 
undertake  to  point  him  out,  or  pretend  to  be  the  man  himself? 
Or  can  it  be  pretended  concerning  any  man,  that  he  knows  the 
truth  fully  and  perfectly  ?  That  he  intermixes  with  it  no  error  ? 
That  he  is  master  of  all,  or  of  the  best  arguments  in  support  of  it ; 
or  of  all  the  best  answers  to  gainsayers  ?  If  not,  it  cannot  be  pre- 
tended that  improvement  is  carried  to  its  utmost  pitch,  even  by 
any  individual.  As  God  is  infinite,  he  is  not,  and  cannot  be  per- 
fectly known  by  men,  or  even  by  angels.  They  and  the  saints 
in  glory  are  constantly  studying  and  improving  in  knowledge. 
Theological  subjects  are  the  things  which  they  desire  to  look  into. 
They  will  carry  on  their  improvements  to  eternity  ;  yet  will  never 
have  exhausted  the  truth.  Much  more  is  there  room  for  the  ut- 
most improvements,  which  we  can  make  in  this  life.  For  our 
encouragement,  we  may  reflect,  that  every  discovery  of  truth 
paves  the  way  for  still  further  discoveries. 


66 


MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 


Though  the  canon  of  scripture  is  complete,  and  we  are  to  ex- 
pect no  further  revelations  ;  yet  many  new  truths  will  break  forth 
from  the  word  of  God,  which  although  now  contained  in  it,  for 
want  of  attention  and  comparing  spiritual  things  with  spiritual, 
are  not  yet  seen.  Further  discoveries  even  in  moral  and  divine 
subjects,  are  also  to  be  expected  from  the  candid  disquisitions  of 
unbiassed  reason.  If  ministers  of  the  gospel  would  be  faithful 
and  diligent  in  their  studies  and  researches  after  truth,  there  is 
not  the  least  reason  to  doubt,  but  that  great  improvements  would 
be  the  consequence ;  and  instead  of  having  occasion  lo  lament, 
that  we  live  at  too  late  a  period  of  the  world,  we  might  find  mat- 
ter of  conviction,  that  we  live  at  too  early  a  period,  to  be  under 
the  best  advantages  to  discover  the  truth.  For  the  more  truth 
there  is  already  discovered,  the  greater  is  the  advantage  for  still 
further  discoveries. 

With  regard  to  you,  dear  sir,  as  I  know  you  to  be  fond  of 
science  and  improvement,  and  to  prefer  theology  to  all  other  sci- 
ences ;  let  me  beseech  you  to  apply  yourself  vigorously,  steadily 
and  perseveringly  to  the  study  of  this  science.  In  this  ample 
field  let  loose  your  whole  genius,  and  employ  your  utmost  abil- 
ities. Here  is  room  enough,  and  objects  sufficiently  grand,  vari- 
ous, entertaining  and  important.  Suffer  not  yourself  to  be  em- 
barrassed with  other  business.  That  ministers  in  general  are 
embarrassed  with  other  business,  is  one  chief  cause  and  indeed 
is  a  necessary  cause  of  their  neglect  of  study ;  and  of  the  little 
improvement  made  by  them.  For  this  embarrassment  with  other 
business,  they  plead  necessity,  arising  from  their  scanty  subsis- 
tence. But  as  you  are  much  better  provided  for  than  most  of  us, 
you  will  not  be  able  to  avail  yourself  of  this  plea.  Therefore  let 
this  people  reap  the  proper  fruits  of  the  generous  support  they 
have  given  you  ;  that  they  may  never  repent  of  what  they  have 
done  in  this  matter.  And  let  others  see  the  beneficial  conse- 
quences of  this  generosity,  and  be  induced  to  imitate  the  exam- 
ple, that  they  also  may  derive  the  same  advantages,  from  the  like 
conduct. 

It  has  been  said,  that  ministers  are  the  most  indolent  set  of 
men  in  the  world  ;  that  therefore  there  is  no  encouragement  to 
give  them  a  larger  support ;  that  they  will  only  spend  it  in  luxu- 
ry, still  neglecting  their  studies  and  other  ministerial  duties  to  as 
great  a  degree  as  ever  ;  that  as  soon  as  they  have  acquired  a 
habit  of  preaching,  or  preparing  their  sermons,  they  throw  to- 
gether something  hastily  and  loosely,  just  so  as  to  fill  up  the  time 
of  three  quarters  of  an  hour  on  the  sabbath  ;  and  that  this  is  the 
utmost  object  of  their  care  or  wishes ;  that  hence  there  is  a  per- 


THE  END  OP  PREACHING.  6^ 

petual,  tasteless,  and  tiresome  sameness  in  all  their  preaching ; 
so  that  when  you  have  heard  two  or  three  of  their  sermons,  you 
have  heard  the  whole  that  they  ever  preach,  and  can  obtain  no 
further  instruction.  By  all  means  prevent  this  complaint  as  to 
yourself,  or  confute  the  charge  by  a  constant  diligence  in  your 
studies.  Be  not  content  with  bare  preparations  for  the  sabbath  ; 
take  care  to  prepare  well ;  bring  beaten  oil  into  the  sanctuary. 
Begin  your  preparations  seasonably  every  week,  that  you  may  not 
be  necessitated  to  hurry  them  over  for  want  of  time.  Preach  on 
a  variety  of  subjects  ;  on  all  the  important  subjects  of  the  law  and 
the  gospel.  These  will  afford  a  great  variety  indeed.  If  you 
study,  your  preaching  will  naturally  comprehend  a  variety  of 
subjects,  and  these  handled  in  a  manner  proper  to  each  subject. 
On  the  other  hand,  if  you  neglect  your  studies,  it  will  as  naturally 
run  into  the  same  track,  as  wheel-carriages  on  the  high-way.  The 
temptations  to  indolence  in  ministerial  studies  are  such,  that  they 
are  too  powerful  for  many ;  let  me  forewarn  you,  that  unless  you 
summon  up  your  utmost  resolution,  there  will  be  danger,  that 
they  will  be  too  powerful  for  you. 

We  who  are  employed  in  the  ministry  have  not  all  the  same 
motives  to  industry,  as  men  of  other  professions,  who  make  gains 
in  proportion  as  they  exert  themselves  in  their  business.  Where- 
as a  minister's  salary  is  fixed,  and  if  he  perform  his  work  barely 
in  such  a  manner  as  to  be  on  good  terms  with  his  people,  his 
support  is  the  same  as  if  he  were  ever  so  laborious  or  industrious. 
Yet  there  are  other  motives  sufficient  to  excite  us  to  industry, 
and  those  such  as  ought  to  influence  us  much  more,  than  the 
prospect  of  gain.  I  mean  the  considerations  of  improvement  in 
divine  knowledge  and  grace  ;  of  diffusing  the  truths  of  the  gospel ; 
of  being  instrumental  in  the  salvation  of  immortal  souls ;  and  of 
glorifying  our  heavenly  Father.  Let  these  have  their  full  weight 
on  you,  dear  sir,  and  prosecute  your  whole  work  under  the  im- 
pression of  them. 

Over  and  above  your  preparations  for  the  sabbath,  take  care  to 
be  constantly  increasing  your  stock  of  knowledge,  by  reading, 
by  reflection,  by  conversation,  and  by  epistolary  correspondence 
on  the  most  important  subjects,  with  men  of  thought  and  litera- 
ture. This  last  mentioned  source  of  improvement,  though  gen- 
erally neglected,  certainly  promises  a  great  increase  of  know- 
ledge. In  this  way  you  may  possess  yourself,  in  a  very  short 
space  of  time,  of  the  knowledge  which  has  cost  others,  perhaps 
years  of  reading  and  reflection. 

In  the  prosecution  of  your  studies,  attend  to  all  subjects  ;  not 
to  all  equally,  but  to  every  one  according  to  its  importance  and 


68  MANIFESTATION  OP  THE  TRUTH, 

usefulness.  Decline  not  proper  attention  to  any  subject,  because 
it  is  unpopular.  However  unpopular,  it  may  be  a  most  important 
and  essential  truth.  Nay,  from  the  very  depravity  of  the  human 
heart,  we  may  expect,  that  the  most  excellent  truths  of  the  gos- 
pel will  be  unpopular.  Decline  not  proper  attention  to  any  sub- 
ject, because  it  is  abstruse  or  hard  to  be  understood.  Everything 
at  present  unknown,  so  far  as  it  is  unknown,  is  necessarily  hard 
to  be  understood.  So  that  if  you  study  nothing  which  is  abstruse, 
you  will  study  nothing  but  what  you  perfectly  know  ;  and  surely 
you  need  not  study  that,  because  you  know  it  already.  The  fa- 
vorite maxim  of  some,  to  study  plain  subjects  only,  will  most  di- 
rectly put  an  end  to  all  study  and  all  improvement. 

In  order  to  such  a  prosecution  of  your  studies  as  I  have  now 
recommended,  it  is  necessary  that  you  be  very  careful  to  waste 
no  part  of  your  time.  And  let  me  recommend  to  you  method  in 
your  studies,  and  in  the  employment  of  your  time.  The  advan- 
tages of  this  are  great  and  manifold. 

Again  ;  be  honest  and  faithful  in  communicating  the  truth  to 
the  people  of  your  charge.  There  are  three  ways  in  which  you 
will  be  called  to  communicate  the  truth — ^preaching — conversa- 
tion— and  discipline. 

Be  honest  and  faithful  in  preaching  the  truth.  Preach  to  the 
consciences  of  your  hearers.  Deliver  not  mere  moral  harangues, 
calculated  only  to  please  the  ear,  to  afford  entertainment  for  three 
quarters  of  an  hour,  or  to  flatter  the  pride  of  your  hearers,  their 
inordinate  self-love,  or  their  other  principles  of  depravity.  Let 
your  sermons  be  fraught  with  the  very  essence  of  the  law  and  of 
the  gospel.  Hold  forth  to  your  hearers  their  relation  to  God,  and 
the  duties  resulting  from  that  relation  ;  their  state  by  nature,  and 
what  their  state  must  be  by  grace.  Point  out  to  them  the  con- 
sequence of  continuing  in  a  state  of  nature,  and  of  entering  on  a 
state  of  grace.  Thus  preach  both  the  terrors  of  the  law,  and  the 
consolations  of  the  gospel.  Bear  full  testimony  to  the  truth  ;  de- 
clare all  the  counsel  of  God  ;  keep  back  nothing  that  can  be  pro- 
fitable to  your  hearers.  Declare  it  plainly,  and  without  intermix- 
ture of  error.  Declare  it  however  unpopular  it  may  be.  You 
are  to  expect,  as  I  Jiave  already  observed,  that  it  will  be  unpop- 
ular, since  it  is  opposed  to  the  carnal  hearts  of  mankind  ;  since  it 
condemns  them  to  eternal  death,  and  cuts  off  all  their  false  hopes 
of  future  felicity.  The  gospel  faithfully  preached  takes  away 
the  gods  of  natural  men,  and  what  have  they  more  ?  Therefore 
you  must  expect  to  be  opposed,  for  the  same  reason  that  men  op- 
pose a  robber  who  would  deprive  them  of  their  property,  or  an 
assassin,  who  would  stab  them  to  the  heart.     Yet  forbear  not  on 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  69 

that  account  to  declare  all  the  counsel  of  God.  Declare  it, 
whether  they  will  hear,  or  whether  they  will  forbear.  Thus  you 
will  at  least  deliver  your  own  soul.  And  the  best  defence  against 
opposition,  is  to  commend  yourself  to  the  consciences  of  your 
hearers.  So  far  as  you  shall  do  this,  they  will  not  dare  to  op- 
pose you. 

Exhibit  the  truth  honestly  in  private  conversation,  as  well  as 
in  preaching.  Besides  visiting  the  sick,  visit  your  people  in  gen- 
eral, as  you  may  have  opportunity,  and  cheerfully  receive  visits 
from  them  ;  not  merely  for  ceremony,  or  for  common  civility  and 
friendship  ;  but  especially  for  religious  conversation  and  improve- 
ment. Free  conversation  on  religious  subjects  is  by  no  means  to 
be  omitted.  This  mode  of  communicating  the  truth  hath  many 
advantages  above  preaching.  It  is  more  free  and  familiar  ;  it 
gives  opportunity  to  state  and  clear  up  doubts  and  objections  ;  to 
enter  into  the  particular  feelings  of  those  with  whom  you  con- 
verse ;  and  to  adapt  your  discourse  to  their  several  capacities. 
Seize  these  advantages  and  use  them  to  the  best  purposes.  Adapt 
your  conversation  to  the  respective  cases  of  your  people  ;  to  their 
security,  their  conviction,  their  sanctification,  their  darkness,  their 
joy,  their  despondence,  their  hopes.  Converse  with  young  peo- 
ple, and  even  with  children,  concerning  their  spiritual  interests. 
The  prospect  of  benefiting  them  by  such  conversation  is  common- 
ly more  promising,  than  of  benefiting  those  of  more  advanced  age  ; 
and  they  are  the  hope  of  the  flock. 

Take  heed  that  you  never  flatter.  This  will  often  be  the  ob- 
ject of  the  wishes  of  those  with  whom  you  converse,  whether  sick 
or  well.  They  will  wish  to  be  comforted,  when  there  is  no  ground 
for  comfort ;  especially  when  death  approaches  ;  and  surrounding 
friends  may  join  their  importunity  to  the  wishes  of  the  dying  man. 
The  temptation  to  comfort  in  this  case,  even  without  foundation, 
will  be  exceedingly  strong.  Beware  that  you  be  not  carried  away 
with  it.  Sew  pillows  under  the  arm-holes  of  none ;  never  daub 
with  untempered  mortar. 

Christian  discipline  is  another  mode  of  exhibiting  the  truth, 
and  though  in  itself  disagreeable,  is  of  divine  institution,  and  is 
absolutely  enjoined.  What  are  the  several  steps  of  admonition, 
confession  and  excommunication,  but  so  many  different  exhibi- 
tions of  the  truth  ?  Honesty  and  fidelity  are  equally  necessary 
in  this  part  of  your  work,  as  in  any  other  ;  and  the  temptation, 
to  a  violation  of  those  virtues  are  equally  great  and  powerful,  if 
not  more  so.  It  will  therefore  be  necessary,  that  you  "  set  your 
face  like  a  flint,"  in  order  to  withstand  those  temptations,  and 
the  opposition,  that  you  must  expect  to  meet  with  in  this  affair. 

Vol.  II.  7 


70  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

Finally,  be  honest  and  faithful  in  your  common  conduct.  The 
scarcity  of  really  honest  men,  has  been  long  since  observed  and 
lamented  by  the  wise  man,  in  that  interrogation,  A  faithful  man 
who  can  find?  The  virtues  of  honesty,  justice  and  fidelity  are 
in  these  degenerate  days  almost  extinguished,  at  least  from  this 
part  of  the  earth.  Now  you  are  called  to  be  an  example  to  this 
flock,  of  these  and  all  other  virtues.  Let  it  be  known  that  the 
church  in  Greenfield  has  a  really  honest  minister.  Strangely  in- 
consistent indeed  is  the  character  of  the  man,  who  is  honest  in 
ministerial  duties  and  services,  but  not  in  his  common  conduct. 
Such  a  character  however  may  exist,  though  it  is  to  be  presumed 
but  rarely  ;  more  rarely  than  the  opposite  character  of  one,  who 
is  honest  and  faithful  in  the  common  affairs  of  life,  but  not  in 
ministerial  services. 

For  motives  to  such  extensive  honesty,  let  me  suggest,  in  the 
first  place.  That  otherwise  you  are  of  course  guilty  of  fraud. 
There  is  no  medium  between  these  two.  And  to  defraud  your 
people  in  your  ministerial  la^)ors,  is  much  worse,  than  to  defraud 
them  of  their  property.  They  may  lose  their  property,  and  yet 
be  happy,  at  least  in  the  future  world.  But  to  defraud  them  in 
your  ministerial  labors,  may  be  the  occasion  of  their  eternal  ruin. 
If  therefore  you  should  wrong  them  out  of  thousands  of  their  pro- 
perty, however  abominable  the  crime  would  be,  it  might  be  a  less 
injury  to  them,  than  if  you  should  wrong  them  in  your  ministe- 
rial work. 

The  good  you  may  do  to  mankind,  and  particularly  to  the 
kingdom  of  God  in  the  world,  is  another  powerful  motive,  to  ex- 
cite you  to  fidelity.  What  consideration  can  be  more  gratifying 
to  a  benevolent  mind,  than  that  of  doing  good  to  mankind,  con- 
tributing to  their  eternal  salvation,  and  giving  glory  to  God  by 
promoting  the  interests  and  ends  of  his  kingdom,  constituted  on 
the  principles  of  the  most  noble  and  general  benevolence  ?  By 
a  faithful  discharge  of  your  duty,  you  may  save  the  souls  of  many, 
which  being  plucked  as  brands  out  of  the  fire,  and  made  the  heirs 
of  eternal  happiness,  will  be  trophies  of  your  victorious  fidelity. 

The  consequences  to  yourself,  on  the  one  hand  and  on  the 
other,  are  presented  to  you,  as  additional  motives  to  fidelity  in 
your  work.  You  are  set  as  a  watchman  to  this  people  ;  you  are 
to  warn  them  of  their  danger,  and  of  every  threatening  foe.  If 
you  do  not  warn  them  according  to  truth,  their  blood  will  be  re- 
quired at  your  hands.  But  if  you  do  faithfully  warn  them,  though 
they  die  in  their  sins,  yet  you  shall  have  delivered  your  soul. 
Nay,  you  shall  not  merely  have  delivered  your  soul,  so  as  at  last 
to  stand  in  your  lot ;  but  you  shall  receive  the  rewards  of  a  faith- 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  71 

ful  servant.  Having  been  faithful  over  a  few  things,  you  shall 
be  made  ruler  over  many  things,  and  shall  enter  into  the  joy  of 
your  Lord. 

II.  It  is  now  time,  that  I  turn  the  address  to  the  church  and 
society  in  this  place. 

Men,  brethren,  and  fathers, — We  congratulate  you  on  the 
events  of  this  day.  You  are  now  to  have  a  minister  set  over  you 
in  the  order  of  the  gospel.  We  congratulate  you  on  your  gene- 
ral and  firm  union  in  this  affair ;  on  your  apparent  just  sense  of 
the  worth  and  importance  of  the  stated  ministration  of  the  divine 
word  and  ordinances  among  you ;  on  your  readiness  to  support 
the  ministry  and  your  willingness  to  expend  of  your  worldly  sub- 
stance for  this  end.  By  your  former  punctuality  in  fulfilling  your 
ministerial  contracts,  it  appears,  you  are  not  only  forward  to  say, 
but  also  to  do.  It  is  common  for  the  preacher  on  such  occasions 
as  the  present,  to  press  the  duty  of  supporting  the  ministry.  But 
your  liberal  engagements  in  the  present  instance,  and  your  for- 
mer punctuality  in  fulfilling  your  engagements,  forbid  me  to  say 
a  word  on  that  head.  Only  persist  in  the  same  line  of  conduct 
which  you  have  hitherto  pursued,  and  you  will  acquire  honor  to 
yourselves,  will  be  examples  to  others,  and  will  put  it  out  of  the 
power  of  your  minister  to  plead  necessity  of  applying  himself  to 
secular  business,  in  the  neglect  of  his  ministerial  work. 

Permit  me,  to  turn  your  attention  to  other  matters.  You  have 
heard  what  has  been  said  to  your  pastor  elect.  What  think  you 
of  it  ?  Do  you  not  wish  that  he  may  be  truly  honest  and  faith- 
ful, and  that  in  all  the  forementioned  respects  ?  Do  you  not 
wish  that  he  may  forever  renounce  the  hidden  things  of  dishon- 
esty, not  walk  in  craftiness,  nor  handle  the  word  of  God  deceit- 
fully ;  but  that  by  manifestation  of  the  truth  he  may  commend 
himself  to  the  conscience  of  every  one  of  you  in  the  sight  of  God  ? 
Without  waiting  for  your  answer,  I  presume  it  would  be  in  the 
affirmative.  Then  oppose  not  his  honesty ;  encourage  it ;  do 
nothing  to  discourage  it.  When  he  tells  you  the  truth,  as  to  doc- 
trines, as  to  discipline,  as  to  practice  ;  when  he  lays  open  the  hu- 
man heart,  exhibits  your  native  depravity,  your  state  of  ruin  in 
yourselves,  your  inability  to  recover  yourselves,  your  dependence 
on  God  and  his  grace ;  and  yet  holds  forth  your  obligation  to 
comply  with  the  whole  law  and  the  whole  gospel ;  your  obligation 
to  repent,  to  do  no  more  so  wickedly,  to  be  reconciled  to  God 
through  Christ ;  when  he  informs  you,  that  you  must  have  an 
interest  in  Christ,  and  that  all  your  righteousnesses,  in  the  matter 
of  justification,  are  but  as  filthy  rags  ;  that  notwithstanding  them, 
God  has  a  right  forever  to  cast  you  off ;  that  you  entirely  deserve 


72  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH, 

it ;  when  he  presses  upon  you  particular  duties,  as  the  duty  of 
prayer  in  the  closet  and  in  the  family,  or  the  duty  of  divine  pub- 
lic worship  ;  or  the  duties  of  justice,  fidelity  and  beneficence  to 
men  ;  when  he  points  out  to  you  the  contrary  sins  and  sets  them 
in  their  proper  glaring  colors ;  when  in  any  of  these  instances  he 
commends  himself  in  such  a  manner  to  your  consciences,  that 
with  a  painful  sense  of  guilt,  you  are  obliged  to  assent  to  the 
truth  ;  yet  be  not  angry  with  him  for  these  things  ;  remember 
that  herein,  he  is  acting  the  part  of  an  honest  and  faithful  minis- 
ter. Although  these  exhibitions  of  truth  are  painful,  yet  submit 
to  them,  be  patient  under  them  ;  they  are  necessary  ;  your  wound 
must  be  probed  to  the  bottom  ;  this  is  for  your  good  ;  it  is 
conducive  to  your  healing.  Therefore  oppose  not  the  necessary 
operation.  Surely  you  would  not  choose  that  your  diseases 
should  be  healed  slightly.  You  cannot  choose  that  your  minister 
should  preach  to  you  flatteries  and  lies,  or  any  smooth  things 
which  are  contrary  to  the  truth,  saying  peace,  peace,  when  there 
is  no  peace  for  you. 

Possibly  some  of  you,  who  are  now  much  pleased  with  the  pas- 
tor elect ;  when  you  shall  have  understood  him  more  thoroughly  ; 
when  you  shall  have  seen  how  his  preaching  condemns  you,  re- 
strains you  in  the  indulgence  of  your  favorite  appetites,  your  ava- 
rice, your  sensuality,  your  inordinate  self-love,  and  other  sinful 
biases  ;  and  how  it  cuts  off"  all  your  fond  but  groundless  hopes 
of  future  peace  and  safety  ;  will  then  be  highly  disgusted,  and  of 
friends  become  bitter  enemies.  If  this  shall  be  the  case  in  any 
instances  ;  remember  that  I  now  forewarn  you  of  it.  And  also 
remember,  how  unkind,  how  inconsistent  it  is  to  desire  an  honest 
minister,  and  then  to  persecute  him  because  he  is  honest !  because 
he  honestly  tells  you  the  truth  ! 

If  it  is  the  duty  of  your  pastor  to  preach  the  truth  faithfully  ; 
it  is  equally  your  duty  to  receive  it,  to  hear  it  attentively,  to  ac- 
quiesce in  it,  to  obey  it. 

You  are  now  settling  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  in  order  that 
you  may  become  christians  and  be  edified  in  the  most  holy  faith. 
But  neither  of  these  is  possible,  unless  at  the  same  time  you  are 
honest  men.  It  is  not  only  necessary  that  your  minister  in  his 
character  be  honest,  but  that  you  also  be  honest,  honest  to  God, 
to  your  own  souls,  and  to  your  fellow  men.  In  the  first  place 
render  unto  God,  the  things  that  are  God's.  Render  him  your 
hearts,  in  a  sincere  and  supreme  love,  and  a  cordial  faith  in  his 
Son  Jesus  Christ.  This  temper  of  course  will  express  itself  in 
all  outward  obedience.  Again,  render  unto  men,  the  things  that 
are  theirs.     The  tendency  of  real  religion  is  to  make  men  in 


THE  END  OF  PREACHING.  73 

every  respect  better  ;  not  only  better  with  regard  to  God  and 
his  worship,  but  better  with  regard  to  one  another  ;  more  kind 
and  beneficent ;  more  tender  hearted  and  obliging  ;  better  neigh- 
bors ;  better  husbands  and  wives  ;  better  parents  and  children  ; 
better  in  all  relations  ;  and  of  course  more  honest  and  faithful. 
As  it  is  opposed  to  all  sin,  it  cannot  but  be  opposed  to  the  sin  of 
injustice  or  dishonesty.  It  requires  us  to  provide  things  honest 
in  the  sight  of  all  men  ;  to  render  unto  all  their  dues  ;  to  owe  no 
man  anything,  but  love. 

This  virtue  is  indeed  neglected  by  some  who  pretend  to  be  the 
subjects  of  true  religion.  They  will  pray  abundantly,  attend  all 
meetings  for  social  worship,  both  in  season  and  out  of  season  ; 
talk  of  religion  without  end  ;  profess  in  the  most  ostentatious 
manner,  love  to  God,  and  all  other  religious  affections.  For  thus 
to  pray,  talk  and  profess,  is  easy  and  cheap.  But  to  practise 
honesty,  often  costs  solid  substance.  For  this  reason  they  hve 
in  the  neglect  of  it.  But  in  vain  will  you  pretend  to  real  religion, 
without  the  manifest  effects  of  it  in  an  honest  life.  Without  an 
honest  life  you  are  no  christians  ;  without  this,  you  can  never 
reach  the  heavenly  state.  "  Know  ye  not  that  the  unrighteous 
shall  not  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God  ?" 

It  is  a  charge  commonly  brought  against  professors  of  Chris- 
tianity, that  they  are  no  more  honest,  and  in  many  instances  less 
honest,  than  other  men.  This  is  a  scandalous  charge  ;  and  if  it 
be  true,  professors  are  a  scandalous  set  of  men.  Let  this  never 
be  true  of  any  of  you  who  are  members  of  the  church  in  this 
place.  Walk  worthy  of  the  holy  vocation  with  which  you  are 
called,  as  in  other  respects,  so  in  practising  universal  honesty. 

Nor  is  it  enough  that  you  yourselves  practise  honesty,  and  suf- 
fer your  minister  to  do  the  same.  You  are  bound  positively  to 
encourage  and  assist  him.  He  will  need  your  assistance  particu- 
larly in  the  discipline  of  the  church.  In  this  difficult  affair  you 
ought  not  to  throw  the  whole  burden  on  him.  You  ought  as 
far  as  may  be,  to  relieve  him,  to  vindicate  him  in  the  discharge 
of  his  duty,  and  to  take  the  burden  on  yourselves.  Especially 
are  you  constantly  to  pray  for  him.  Even  the  great  apostle  Paul, 
in  his  epistles  repeatedly  desires  those  to  whom  he  wrote,  to  pray 
for  him  and  the  other  apostles  ;  "  brethren  pray  for  us,"  is  an  ex- 
pression familiar  to  him.  Therefore  in  all  your  approaches  to 
the  throne  of  grace,  remember  your  minister. 

"  And  now,  brethren,  we  commend  you  to  God,  and  to  the 
word  of  his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  you  up,  and  to  give  you 
an  inheritance  among  all  them  that  are  sanctified."  May  you 
have  peace  and  be  edified.     May  you  long  enjoy  the  pastor  who 

7* 


74  MANIFESTATION  OF  THE  TRUTH,  ETC. 

is  now  to  be  set  over  you  in  the  Lord.  May  he  be  a  burning 
and  a  shining  hght,  and  may  you  continue  to  rejoice  in  his  light. 
May  this  church  ever  approve  itself  to  be  a  true  church  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun,  and  ter- 
rible as  an  army  with  banners.  May  every  one  of  your  souls  be 
a  temple  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  in  which  God  shall  dwell  and 
walk  ;  till  you  all  shall  come  in  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the 
knowledge  of  the  Son  of  God,  unto  a  perfect  man,  unto  the  mea- 
sure of  the  stature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ.  And  may  Christ 
sanctify  and  cleanse  this  church,  with  the  washing  of  water,  by 
the  word,  that  he  may  present  it  to  himself  a  glorious  church, 
not  having  spot  or  wrinkle,  or  any  such  thing. 


SERMON  V. 


THE  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE  SLAVE  TRADE, 
AND  OF  SLAVERY.* 

Matthew  7 :  12. — Therefore  all  things  ivhatsoever  ye  would,  that  men  should 
do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them ;  for  this  is  the  law  and.  the  prophets. 

This  precept  of  our  divine  Lord  hath  always  been  admired  as 
most  excellent ;  and  doubtless  with  the  greatest  reason.  Yet  it 
needs  some  explanation.  It  is  not  surely  to  be  understood  in  the 
most  unlimited  sense,  implying  that  because  a  prince  expects 
and  wishes  for  obedience  from  his  subjects,  he  is  obliged  to  obey 
them  ;  that  because  parents  wish  their  children  to  submit  to  their 
government,  therefore  they  are  to  submit  to  the  government  of 
their  children  ;  or  that  because  some  men  wish  that  others  would 
concur  and  assist  them  to  the  gratification  of  their  unlawful  de- 
sires, therefore  they  also  are  to  gratify  the  unlawful  desires  of 
others.  But  whatever  we  are  conscious  that  we  should,  in  an 
exchange  of  circumstances,  wish,  and  are  persuaded  that  we 
might  reasonably  wish,  that  others  would  do  to  us  ;  that  we  are 
bound  to  do  to  them.  This  is  the  general  rule  given  us  in  the 
text ;  and  a  very  extensive  rule  it  is,  reaching  to  all  our  actions  ; 
and  is  particularly  useful  to  direct  our  conduct  toward  inferiors, 
and  those  whom  we  have  in  our  power.  I  have  therefore  thought 
it  a  proper  foundation  for  the  discourse,  which  by  the  Society  for 
the  promotion  of  Freedom,  and  for  the  Relief  of  Persons  un^ 
lawfully  holden  in  Bondage,  I  have  the  honor  to  be  appointed 
to  deliver,  on  the  present  occasion. 

This  divine  maxim  is  most  properly  applicable  to  the  slave 
trade,  and  to  the  slavery  of  the  Africans.  Let  us  then  make  the 
application. 

Should  we  be  willing,  that  the  Africans  or  any  other  nation 
should  purchase  us,  our  wives  and  children,  transport  us  into 
Africa  and  there  sell  us  into  perpetual  and  absolute  slavery? 

*  Preached  before  the  Connecticut  Society  for  the  promotion  of  Free- 
dom, and  for  the  Rehef  of  Persons  unlawfully  holden  in  Bondage,  at  their 
Annual  Meeting  in  New-Haven,  Sept.  15,  1791,  and  published  by  request. 


76  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OP  THE 

Should  we  be  willing,  that  they  by  large  bribes  and  offers  of  a 
gainful  traffic  should  entice  our  neighbors  to  kidnap  and  sell  us 
to  them,  and  that  they  should  hold  in  perpetual  and  cruel  bondage, 
not  only  ourselves,  but  our  posterity  through  all  generations  ? 
Yet  why  is  it  not  as  right  for  them  to  treat  us  in  this  manner,  as  it 
is  for  us  to  treat  them  in  the  same  manner  ?  Their  color  indeed  is 
different  from  ours.  But  does  this  give  us  a  right  to  enslave  them  ? 
The  nations  from  Germany  to  Guinea  have  complexions  of  every 
shade  from  the  fairest  white  to  a  jetty  black  ;  and  if  a  black 
complexion  subject  a  nation  or  an  individual  to  slavery,  where 
shall  slavery  begin,  or  where  shall  it  end  ? 

I  propose  to  mention  a  few  reasons  against  the  right  of  the 
slave  trade — and  then  to  consider  the  principal  arguments,  which 
I  have  ever  heard  urged  in  favor  of  it.  What  will  be  said  against 
the  slave  trade  will  generally  be  equally  applicable  to  slavery  it- 
self; and  if  conclusive  against  the  former,  will  be  equally  so 
against  the  latter. 

As  to  the  slave  trade,  I  conceive  it  to  be  unjust  in  itself — 
abominable  on  account  of  the  cruel  manner  in  which  it  is  con- 
ducted— and  totally  wrong  on  account  of  the  impolicy  of  it,  or 
its  destructive  tendency  to  the  moral  and  political  interests  of  any 
country. 

I.  It  is  unjust  in  itself. 

It  is  unjust  in  the  same  sense,  and  for  the  same  reason,  that  it 
is,  to  steal,  to  rob,  or  to  murder.  It  is  a  principle,  the  truth  of 
which  hath  in  this  country  been  generally,  if  not  universally  ac- 
knowledged, ever  since  the  commencement  of  the  late  war,  that 
all  men  are  ho7'n  equally  free.  If  this  be  true,  the  Africans  are 
by  nature  equally  entitled  to  freedom  as  we  are ;  and  therefore  we 
have  no  more  right  to  enslave,  or  to  afford  aid  to  enslave  them, 
than  they  have  to  do  the  same  to  us.  They  have  the  same  right 
to  their  freedom,  which  they  have  to  their  property  or  to  their 
lives.  Therefore  to  enslave  them  is  as  really  and  in  the  same 
sense  wrong,  as  to  steal  from  them,  or  to  rob  or  murder  them. 

There  are  indeed  cases  in  which  men  may  justly  be  deprived 
of  their  hberty  and  reduced  to  slavery,  as  there  are  cases  in  which 
they  may  be  justly  deprived  of  their  lives.  But  they  can  justly 
be  deprived  of  neither,  unless  they  have  by  their  own  voluntary 
conduct  forfeited  it.  Therefore  still  the  right  to  liberty  stands  on 
the  same  basis  with  the  right  to  life.  And  that  the  Africans  have 
done  something  whereby  they  have  forfeited  their  liberty  must 
appear,  before  we  can  justly  deprive  them  of  it ;  as  it  must  appear, 
that  they  have  done  something  whereby  they  have  forfeited  their 
lives,  before  we  may  justly  deprive  them  of  these. 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF  SLAVERY.  77 

II.  The  slave  trade  is  wicked  and  abominable  on  account  of 
the  cruel  manner  in  which  it  is  carried  on. 

Beside  the  stealing  or  kidnapping  of  men,  women  and  children, 
in  the  first  instance,  and  the  instigation  of  others  to  this  abomi- 
nable practice  ;  the  inhuman  manner  in  which  they  are  transport- 
ed to  America,  and  in  which  they  are  treated  on  their  passage 
and  in  their  subsequent  slavery,  is  such  as  ought  forever  to  deter 
every  man  from  acting  any  part  in  this  business,  who  has  any  re- 
gard to  justice  or  humanity.  They  are  crowded  so  closely  into 
the  holds  and  between  the  decks  of  vessels,  that  they  have  scarce- 
ly room  to  lie  down,  and  sometimes  not  room  to  sit  up  in  an  erect 
posture  ;  the  men  at  the  same  time  fastened  together  with  irons 
by  two  and  two ;  and  all  this  in  the  most  sultry  climate.  The 
consequence  of  the  whole  is,  that  the  most  dangerous  and  fatal 
diseases  are  soon  bred  among  them,  whereby  vast  numbers  of 
those  exported  from  Africa  perish  in  the  voyage ;  while  others  in 
dread  of  that  slavery  which  is  before  them,  and  in  distress  and 
despair  from  the  loss  of  their  parents,  their  children,  their  hus- 
bands, their  wives,  all  their  dear  connections,  and  their  dear  na- 
tive country  itself,  starve  themselves  to  death  or  plunge  themselves 
into  the  ocean.  Those  who  attempt  in  the  former  of  those  ways 
to  escape  from  their  persecutors,  are  tortured  by  live  coals  applied 
to  their  mouths.  Those  who  attempt  an  escape  in  the  latter  and 
fail,  are  equally  tortured  by  the  most  cruel  beating,  or  otherwise 
as  their  persecutors  please.  If  any  of  them  make  an  attempt,  as 
they  sometimes  do,  to  recover  their  liberty,  some,  and  as  the  cir- 
cumstances may  be,  many,  are  put  to  immediate  death.  Others 
beaten,  bruised,  cut  and  mangled  in  a  most  inhuman  and  shock- 
ing manner,  are  in  this  situation  exhibited  to  the  rest,  to  terrify 
them  from  the  like  attempt  in  future  ;  and  some  are  delivered  up 
to  every  species  of  torment,  whether  by  the  application  of  the 
whip,  or  of  any  other  instrument,  even  of  fire  itself,  as  the  inge- 
nuity of  the  ship-master  and  of  his  crew  is  able  to  suggest  or 
their  situation  will  admit ;  and  these  torments  are  purposely  con- 
tinued for  several  days,  before  death  is  permitted  to  afford  relief 
to  these  objects  of  vengeance.* 

By  these  means,  according  to  the  common  computation,  twen- 
ty-five thousand,  which  is  a  fourth  part  of  those  who  are  exported 
from  Africa,  and  by  the  concession  of  all,  twenty  thousand,  an- 
nually perish,  before  they  arrive  at  the  places  of  their  destination 
in  America. 


*  If  any  doubt  these  statements,  they  are  requested  to  peruse  Clarkson's 
History  of  the  Abolition  of  the  slave  trade.  This  trade  is  at  present  carried 
on  in  all  its  horrors. 


78  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

But  this  is  by  no  means  the  end  of  the  sufferings  of  this  un- 
happy people.  Bred  up  in  a  country  spontaneously  yielding  the 
necessaries  and  conveniences  of  savage  life,  they  have  never  been 
accustomed  to  labor ;  of  course  they  are  but  ill  prepared  to  go 
through  the  fatigue  and  drudgery  to  which  they  are  doomed  in 
their  state  of  slavery.  Therefore  partly  by  this  cause,  pardy  by 
the  scantiness  and  badness  of  their  food,  and  partly  from  dejec- 
tion of  spirits,  mortification  and  despair,  another  twenty-five 
thousand  die  in  the  seasoning,  as  it  is  called,  i.  e.  within  two 
years  after  their  arrival  in  America.  This  I  say  is  the  common 
computation.  Or  if  we  will  in  this  particular  be  as  favorable  to 
the  trade  as  in  the  estimate  of  the  number  which  perishes  on  the 
passage,  we  may  reckon  the  number  which  dies  in  the  seasoning 
to  be  twenty  thousand.  So  that  of  the  hundred  tliousand  an- 
nually exported  from  Africa  to  America,  fifty  thousand,  as  it  is 
commonly  computed,  or  on  the  most  favorable  estimate,  forty 
thousand,  die  before  they  are  seasoned  to  the  country. 

Nor  is  this  all.  The  cruel  sufferings  of  these  pitiable  beings 
are  not  yet  at  an  end.  Thenceforward  they  have  to  drag  out  a 
miserable  fife  in  absolute  slavery,  entirely  at  the  disposal  of  their 
masters,  by  whom  not  only  every  venial  fault,  every  mere  inad- 
vertence or  mistake,  but  even  real  virtues,  are  liable  to  be  con- 
strued into  the  most  atrocious  crimes,  and  punished  as  such,  ac- 
cording to  their  caprice  or  rage,  while  they  are  intoxicated  some- 
times witii  strong  drink,  sometimes  with  passion. 

By  these  masters  they  are  supplied  with  barely  enough  to  keep 
them  from  starving,  as  the  whole  expense  laid  out  on  a  slave  for 
food,  clothing  and  medicine  is  commonly  computed  on  an  ave- 
rage at  thirty  shillings  sterling  annually.  At  the  same  time  they 
are  kept  at  hard  labor  from  five  o'clock  in  the  morning,  till  nine 
at  night,  excepting  time  to  eat  twice  during  the  day.  And  they 
are  constantly  under  the  watchful  eye  of  overseers  and  negro- 
drivers  more  tyrannical  and  cruel  than  even  their  masters  them- 
selves. From  these  drivers,  for  every  imagined,  as  well  as  real 
neglect  or  want  of  exertion,  they  receive  the  lash,  the  smack  of 
which  is  all  day  long  in  the  ears  of  those  who  are  on  the  planta- 
tion or  in  the  vicinity  ;  and  it  is  used  with  such  dexterity  and  se- 
verity, as  not  only  to  lacerate  the  skin,  but  to  tear  out  small  por- 
tions of  the  flesh  at  ahnost  every  stroke. 

This  is  the  general  treatment  of  the  slaves.*  But  many  indi- 
viduals suffer  still  more  severely.   Many  are  knocked  down  ;  some 

*  This  declaration  is  not  at  the  present  time  true  ;  at  least  as  respects 
our  own  country.  Instances  of  cruelty,  undoubtedly,  do  occur,  but  it  is 
believed  receive  no  countenance  from  public  opinion. — Ed. 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF   SLAVERY.  79 

have  their  eyes  beaten  out ;  some  have  an  arm  or  a  leg  broken, 
or  chopped  off;  and  many  for  a  very  small  or  for  no  crime  at  all, 
have  been  beaten  to  death  merely  to  gratify  the  fury  of  an  en- 
raged master  or  overseer. 

Nor  ought  we  on  this  occasion  to  overlook  the  wars  among  the 
nations  of  Africa  excited  by  the  trade,  or  the  destruction  attend- 
ant on  those  wars.  Not  to  mention  the  destruction  of  property, 
the  burning  of  towns  and  villages,  etc.  it  has  been  determined  by 
reasonable  computation,  that  there  are  annually  exported  from 
Africa  to  the  various  parts  of  America,  one  hundred  thousand 
slaves,  as  was  before  observed  ;  that  of  these,  six  thousand  are 
captives  of  war ;  that  in  the  wars  in  which  these  are  taken,  ten 
persons  of  the  victors  and  vanquished  are  killed,  to  one  taken  ; 
that  therefore  the  taking  of  the  six  thousand  captives  is  attended 
with  the  slaughter  of  sixty  thousand  of  their  countrymen.  Now 
does  not  justice,  does  not  humanity  shrink  from  the  idea,  that  in 
order  to  procure  one  slave  to  gratify  our  avarice,  we  should  put 
to  death  ten  human  beings  ?  Or  that  in  order  to  increase  our 
property,  and  that  only  in  some  small  degree,  we  should  carry  on 
a  trade,  or  even  connive  at  it,  to  support  which  sixty  thousand 
of  our  own  species  are  slain  in  war  ? 

These  sixty  thousand,  added  to  the  forty  thousand  who  perish 
on  the  passage  and  in  the  seasoning,  gives  us  an  hundred  thou- 
sand who  are  annually  destroyed  by  the  trade  ;  and  the  whole 
advantage  gained  by  this  amazing  destruction  of  human  lives  is 
sixty  thousand  slaves.  For  you  will  recollect,  that  the  whole 
number  exported  from  Africa  is  an  hundred  thousand  ;  that  of 
these  forty  thousand  die  on  the  passage  and  in  the  seasoning,  and 
sixty  thousand  are  destroyed  in  the  wars.  Therefore  while  one 
hundred  and  sixty  thousand  are  killed  in  the  wars  and  are  ex- 
ported from  Africa,  but  sixty  thousand  are  added  to  the  stock  of 
slaves. 

Now  when  we  consider  all  this ;  when  we  consider  the  mise- 
ries which  this  unhappy  people  suffer  in  their  wars,  in  their  cap- 
tivity, in  their  voyage  to  America,  and  during  a  wretched  life  of  \J 
cruel  slavery  ;  and  especially  when  w^e  consider  the  annual  de- 
struction of  an  hundred  thousand  lives  in  the  manner  before  men- 
tioned ;  who  can  hesitate  to  declare  this  trade  and  the  consequent 
slavery  to  be  contrary  to  every  principle  of  justice  and  humanity, 
of  the  law  of  nature  and  of  the  law  of  God. 

III.  This  trade  and  this  slavery  ai'e  utterly  ivrong  on  the 
ground  of  their  impolicy.  In  a  variety  of  respects  they  are  ex- 
ceedingly hurtful  to  the  state  which  tolerates  them. 

1.  They  are  hurtful,  as  they  deprave  the  morals  of  the  people. 


80  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

The  incessant  and  inhuman  cruehies  practised  in  the  trade  and 
in  the  subsequent  slavery,  necessarily  tend  to  harden  the  human 
heart  against  the  tender  feelings  of  humanity  in  the  masters  of 
vessels,  in  the  sailors,  in  the  factors,  in  the  proprietors  of  the 
slaves,  in  their  children,  in  the  overseers,  in  the  slaves  themselves, 
and  in  all  who  habitually  see  those  cruelties.  Now  the  eradica- 
tion or  even  the  diminution  of  compassion,  tenderness  and  hu- 
manity, is  certainly  a  great  depravation  of  heart,  and  must  be 
followed  with  correspondent  depravity  of  manners.  And  mea- 
sures which  lead  to  such  depravity  of  heart  and  manners,  cannot 
but  be  extremely  hurtful  to  the  state,  and  consequently  are  ex- 
tremely impolitic. 

2.  The  trade  is  impolitic  as  it  is  so  destructive  of  the  lives  of 
seamen.  The  ingenious  Mr.  Clarkson  hath  in  a  very  satisfactory 
manner  made  it  appear,  that  in  the  slave  trade  alone  Great  Britain 
loses  annually  about  nineteen  hundred  seamen  ;  and  that  this  loss 
is  more  than  double  the  loss  annually  sustained  by  that  country 
in  all  her  other  trade  taken  together.  And  doubtless  we  lose  as 
many  as  Great  Britain  in  proportion  to  the  number  of  seamen 
whom  we  employ  in  this  trade.  Now  can  it  be  politic  to  carry 
on  a  trade  which  is  so  destructive  of  that  useful  part  of  our  citi- 
zens, our  seamen  ? 

3.  African  slavery  is  exceedingly  impolitic,  as  it  discourages 
industry.  Nothing  is  more  essential  to  the  political  prosperity 
of  any  state,  than  industry  in  the  citizens.  But  in  proportion  as 
slaves  are  multiplied,  every  kind  of  labor  becomes  ignominious  ; 
and  in  fact,  in  those  of  the  United  States,  in  which  slaves  are  the 
most  numerous,  gentlemen  and  ladies  of  any  fashion  disdain  to 
employ  themselves  in  business,  which  in  other  states  is  consistent 
with  the  dignity  of  the  first  families  and  first  offices.  In  a  coun- 
try filled  with  negro  slaves,  labor  belongs  to  them  only,  and  a 
white  man  is  despised  in  proportion  as  he  applies  to  it.  Now 
how  destructive  to  industry  in  all  of  the  lowest  and  middle  class 
of  citizens,  such  a  situation  and  the  prevalence  of  such  ideas  will 
be,  you  can  easily  conceive.  The  consequence  is,  that  some  will 
nearly  starve,  others  will  betake  themselves  to  the  most  dishonest 
practices,  to  obtain  the  means  of  living. 

As  slavery  produces  indolence  in  the  white  people,  so  it  pro- 
duces all  those  vices  which  are  naturally  connected  with  it ;  such 
as  intemperance,  lewdness  and  prodigality.  These  vices  enfee- 
ble both  the  body  and  the  mind,  and  unfit  men  for  any  vigorous 
exertions  and  employments  either  external  or  mental.  And  those 
who  are  unfit  for  such  exertions,  are  already  a  very  degenerate 
race  ;    degenerate,  not  only  in  a  moral,  but  a  natural  sense. 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF   SLAVERY.  81 

They  are  contemptible  too,  and  will  soon  be  despised  even  by 
their  negroes  themselves. 

Slavery  tends  to  lewdness  not  only  as  it  produces  indolence, 
but  as  it  affords  abundant  opportunity  for  that  wickedness  with- 
out either  the  danger  and  difficulty  of  an  attack  on  the  virtue 
of  a  woman  of  chastity,  or  of  the  danger  of  a  connection  with 
one  of  ill  fame.  And  we  learn  the  too  frequent  influence  and 
effect  of  such  a  situation,  not  only  from  common  fame,  but  from 
the  multitude  of  mulattoes  in  countries  where  slaves  are  very 
numerous. 

Slavery  has  a  most  direct  tendency  to  haughtiness  also,  and  a 
domineering  spirit  and  conduct  in  the  proprietors  of  the  slaves,  in 
their  children,  and  in  all  who  have  the  control  of  them.  A  man 
who  has  been  bred  up  in  domineering  over  negroes,  can  scarcely 
avoid  contracting  such  a  habit  of  haughtiness  and  domination,  as 
will  express  itself  in  his  general  treatment  of  mankind,  whether 
in  his  private  capacity,  or  in  any  office  civil  or  military  with 
which  he  may  be  vested.  Despotism  in  economics  naturally 
leads  to  despotism  in  politics,  and  domestic  slavery  in  a  free  gov- 
ernment is  a  perfect  solecism  in  human  affairs. 

How  baneful  all  these  tendencies  and  effects  of  slavery  must 
be  to  the  public  good,  and  especially  to  the  public  good  of  such  a 
free  country  as  ours,  I  need  not  inform  you. 

4.  In  the  same  proportion  as  industry  and  labor  are  discour- 
aged, is  population  discouraged  and  prevented.  This  is  an- 
other respect  in  which  slavery  is  exceedingly  impolitic.  That  pop- 
ulation is  prevented  in  proportion  as  industry  is  discouraged,  is, 
I  conceive,  so  plain  that  nothing  needs  to  be  said  to  illustrate  it. 
Mankind  in  general  will  enter  into  matrimony  as  soon  as  they 
^'^•)ssess  the  means  of  supporting  a  family.  But  the  great  body  of 
any  people  have  no  other  way  of  supporting  themselves  or  a  fam- 
ily, than  by  their  own  labor.  Of  course  as  labor  is  discouraged, 
matrimony  is  discouraged  and  population  is  prevented.  But  the 
impolicy  of  whatever  produces  these  effects  will  be  acknowledged 
by  all.  The  wealth,  strength  and  glory  of  a  state  depend  on  the 
number  of  its  virtuous  citizens  ;  and  a  state  without  citizens  is  at 
least  as  great  an  absurdity,  as  a  king  without  subjects. 

5.  The  impolicy  of  slavery  still  further  appears  from  this,  that 
it  weakens  the  state,  and  in  proportion  to  the  degree  in  which  it 
exists,  exposes  it  to  become  an  easy  conquest.  The  increase  of 
free  citizens  is  an  increase  of  the  strength  of  the  state.  But  not  so 
with  regard  to  the  increase  of  slaves.  They  not  only  add  no- 
thing to  the  strength  of  the  state,  but  actually  diminish  it  in  pro- 

'yortion  to  their  number.     Every  slave  is  naturally  an  enemy  to 
VoL.]^  8 


82  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

the  state  in  which  he  is  holden  in  slavery,  and  wants  nothing  but 
\  /        an  opportunity  to  assist  in  its  overthrow.     And  an  enemy  within 
a  state,  is  much  more  dangerous  than  one  without  it. 

These  observations  concerning  the  prevention  of  population 
and  weakening  the  state,  are  supported  by  facts  which  have  fall- 
en within  our  own  observation.  That  the  southern  states,  in 
which  slaves  are  so  numerous,  are  in  no  measure  so  populous,  ac- 
cording to  the  extent  of  territory,  as  the  northern,  is  a  fact  of 
universal  notoriety  ;  and  that  during  the  late  war,  the  southern 
states  found  themselves  greatly  weakened  by  their  slaves,  and 
therefore  were  so  easily  overrun  by  the  British  army,  is  equally 
notorious. 

From  the  view  we  have  now  taken  of  this  subject,  we  scruple 
not  to  infer,  that  to  carry  on  the  slave  trade  and  to  introduce 
slaves  into  our  country,  is  not  only  to  be  guilty  of  injustice,  rob- 
bery and  cruelty  toward  our  fellow  men  ;  but  it  is  to  inju.^e  our- 
selves and  our  country  ;  and  therefore  it  is  altogether  unjustifi- 
able, wicked  and  abominable. 

Having  thus  considered  the  injustice  and  ruinous  tendency  of 
the  slave  trade,  I  proceed  to  attend  to  the  principal  arguments 
urged  in  favor  of  it. 

1.  It  is  said  that  the  Africans  are  the  posterity  of  Ham,  the  son 
Noah  ;  that  Canaan  one  of  Ham's  sons,  was  cursed  by  Noah  to 
be  a  servant  of  servants  ;  that  by  Canaan  we  are  to  understand 
Ham's  posterity  in  general ;  that  as  his  posterity  are  devoted  by 
God  to  slavery,  we  have  a  right  to  enslave  them.  This  is  the 
argument ;  to  w^hich  I  answer  : 

It  is  indeed  generally  thought  that  Ham  peopled  Africa  ;  but 
that  the  curse  on  Canaan  extended  to  all  the  posterity  of  Ham  is 
a  mere  imagination.  The  only  reason  given  for  it  is,  that  Ca- 
naan was  only  one  of  Ham's  sons  ;  and  that  it  seems  reasonable, 
that  the  curse  of  Ham's  conduct  should  fall  on  all  his  posteri- 
ty, if  on  any.  But  this  argument  is  insufficient.  We  might  as 
clearly  argue,  that  the  judgments  denounced  on  the  house  of 
David,  on  account  of  his  sin  in  the  matter  of  Uriah,  must  equally 
fall  on  all  his  posterity.  Yet  we  know,  that  many  of  them  lived 
and  died  in  great  prosperity.  So  in  every  case  in  which  judg- 
ments are  predicted  concerning  any  nation  or  family. 

It  is  allowed  in  this  argument,  that  the  curse  was  to  fall  on  the 
posterity  of  Ham,  and  not  immediately  on  Ham  himself;  if 
otherwise,  it  is  nothing  to  the  purpose  of  the  slave  trade,  or  of 
any  slaves  now  in  existence.  It  being  allowed  then,  that  this 
curse  was  to  fall  on  Ham's  posterity,  he  who  had  a  right  to  curse 
the  whole  of  that  posterity,  had  the  same  right  to  curse  a  part  of 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF   SLAVERY.  83 

it  only,  and  the  posterity  of  Canaan  equally  as  any  other  part ; 
and  a  curse  on  Hatn's  posterity  in  the  line  of  Canaan  was  as  real 
a  curse  on  Hani  himself,  as  a  curse  on  all  his  posterity  would 
have  been. 

Tlierefore  we  have  no  ground  to  believe,  that  this  curse  re- 
spected any  others,  than  the  posterity  of  Canaan,  who  lived  in 
the  land  of  Canaan,  which  is  well  known  to  be  remote  from  Af- 
rica. We  have  a  particular  account,  that  all  the  sons  of  Canaan 
settled  in  the  land  of  Canaan  ;  as  may  be  seen  in  Gen.  10:  15 — 
20,  "  And  Canaan  begat  Sidon  his  first-born,  and  Heth,  and  the 
Jebusite,  and  the  Emorite,  and  the  Girgasite,  and  the  Ilivite,  and 
the  Arkite,  and  the  Sinite,  and  the  Arvadite,  and  the  Zemarite, 
and  the  Hamathite  ;  and  afterward  were  the  families  of  the  Ca- 
iiaanites  spread  abroad.  And  the  border  of  the  Canaanites  was 
from  Sidon,  as  thou  comest  to  Gerar,  unto  Gaza ;  as  thou  goest 
unto  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  Admah,  and  Zeboim,  even  unto  La- 
shah."  Nor  have  we  account  that  any  of  their  posterity  except 
the  Carthaginians  afterward  removed  to  any  part  of  Africa  ;  and 
none  will  pretend  that  these  peopled  Africa  in  general  ;  especial- 
ly considering,  that  they  were  subdued,  destroyed  and  so  far  ex- 
tirpated by  the  Romans. 

This  curse  then  of  the  posterity  of  Canaan,  had  no  reference 
to  the  inhabitants  of  Guinea,  or  of  Africa  in  general ;  but  was  ful- 
filled partly  in  Joshua's  time,  in  the  reduction  and  servitude  of 
the  Canaanites,  and  especially  of  the  Gibeonites  ;  partly  by  what 
the  Phenicians  suffered  from  the  Chaldeans,  Persians  and  Greeks ; 
and  finally  by  what  the  Carthaginians  suffered  from  the  P^-omans. 

Therefore  this  curse  gives  us  no  right  to  enslave  the  Africans, 
as  we  do  by  the  slave  trade,  because  it  has  no  respect  to  the  Af- 
ricans whom  we  enslave.  Nor  if  it  had  respected  them,  would 
it  have  given  any  such  right ;  because  it  was  not  an  institution 
of  slavery,  but  a  mere  prophecy  of  it.  And  from  this  prophecy 
we  have  no  more  ground  to  infer  the  right  of  slavery,  than  we 
have  from  the  prophecy  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Ne- 
buchadnezzar, or  by  the  Romans,  to  infer  their  right  respectively 
to  destroy  it  in  the  manner  they  did  ;  or  from  other  prophecies 
to  infer  the  right  of  Judas  to  betray  his  master,  or  of  the  Jews  to 
crucify  him. 

2.  The  right  of  slavery  is  inferred  from  the  instance  of  Abra- 
ham, who  had  servants  born  in  his  house  and  bought  with  his 
money.  But  it  is  by  no  means  certain,  that  these  were  slaves,  as 
our  negroes  are.  If  they  were,  it  is  unaccountable,  that  he  went 
out  at  the  head  of  an  army  of  them  to  fight  his  enemies.  No 
West-India  [)lanter  would  easily  be  induced  to  venture  himself  in 
such  a  situation.     It  is  far  more  probable,  that  similar  to  some  of 


84  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

the  vassals  under  the  feudal  constitution,  the  servants  of  Abra- 
ham were  only  in  a  good  measure  dependent  on  him,  and  pro- 
tected by  him.  But  if  they  were  to  all  intents  and  purposes 
slaves,  Abraham's  holding  of  them  will  no  more  prove  the  right 
of  slavery,  than  his  going  in  to  Hagar,  will  prove  it  right  for  any 
man  to  indulge  in  criminal  intercourse  with  his  domestic. 

3.  From  the  divine  permission  given  the  Israelites  to  buy 
servants  of  the  nations  round  about  them,  it  is  argued,  that  we 
have  a  right  to  buy  the  Africans  and  hold  them  in  slavery.  See 
Lev.  25:  44 — 47,  "  Both  thy  bondmen  and  thy  bondmaids,  which 
thou  shalt  have,  shall  be  of  the  heathen  that  are  round  about 
you  ;  of  them  shall  ye  buy  bondmen  and  bondmaids.  Moreover, 
of  the  children  of  the  strangers  that  do  sojourn  among  you,  of 
them  shall  ye  buy,  and  of  their  families,  that  are  with  you,  which 
they  begat  in  your  land  ;  and  they  shall  be  your  possession.  And 
ye  shall  take  them  as  an  inheritance  for  your  children  after  you, 
to  inherit  them  for  a  possession  ;  they  shall  be  your  bondmen 
forever  ;  but  over  your  brethren  the  children  of  Israel  ye  shall 
not  rule  one  over  another  with  rigor."  But  if  this  be  at  all  to 
the  purpose,  it  is  a  permission  to  every  nation  under  heaven  to 
buy  slaves  of  the  nations  round  about  them  ;  to  us,  to  buy  of  our 
Indian  neighbors  ;  to  them,  to  buy  of  us  ;  to  the  French,  to  buy 
of  the  English,  and  to  the  English  to  buy  of  the  French  ;  and  so 
through  the  world.  If  then  this  argument  be  valid,  every  man 
has  an  entire  right  to  engage  in  this  trade,  and  to  buy  and  sell 
any  other  man  of  another  nation,  and  any  other  man  of  another 
nation  has  an  entire  right  to  buy  and  sell  him.  Thus  according  to 
this  construction,  Ave  have  in  Lev.  25:  43,  etc.  an  institution  of 
a  universal  slave  trade,  by  which  every  man  may  not  only  become 
a  merchant,  but  may  rightfully  become  the  merchandise  itself  of 
this  trade,  and  may  be  bought  and  sold  like  a  beast.  Now  this 
consequence  will  be  given  up  as  absurd,  and  therefore  also  the 
construction  of  scripture  from  which  it  follows,  must  be  given  up. 
Yet  it  is  presumed,  that  there  is  no  avoiding  that  construction  or 
the  absurdity  flowing  from  it,  but  by  admitting,  that  this  permis- 
sion to  the  Israelites  to  buy  slaves  has  no  respect  to  us,  but  was 
in  the  same  manner  peculiar  to  them,  as  the  permission  and 
command  to  subdue,  destroy  and  extirpate  the  whole  Canaanitish 
nation  ;  and  therefore  no  more  gives  countenance  to  African  sla- 
very, than  the  command  to  extirpate  the  Canaanites,  gives  coun- 
tenance to  the  extirpation  of  any  nation  in  these  days,  by  a  uni- 
versal slaughter  of  men  and  women,  young  men  and  ma  dens, 
infants  and  sucklings. 

(4)   It  is  further  pleaded,  that  there  were  slaves  in  the  times 
of  the  apostles ;  that  they  did  not  forbid  the  holding  of  those 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND   OF   SLAVERY.  85 

slaves,  but  gave  directions  to  servants,  doubtless  referring  to  the 
servants  of  that  day,  to  obey  their  masters,  and  count  them  wor- 
thy of  all  honor. 

To  this  the  answer  is,  that  the  apostles  teach  the  general  du- 
ties of  servants  who  are  righteously  in  the  state  of  servitude,  as 
many  are  or  may  be,  by  hire,  by  indenture,  and  by  judgment  of 
a  civil  court.  But  they  do  not  say,  whether  the  servants  in  gen- 
eral of  that  day  were  justly  holden  in  slavery  or  not.  In  like 
manner  they  lay  down  the  general  rules  of  obedience  to  civil 
magistrates,  without  deciding  concerning  the  characters  of  the 
magistrates  of  the  Roman  empire  in  the  reign  of  Nero.  And  as 
the  apostle  Paul  requires  masters  to  give  their  servants  that  which 
is  just  and  equal  (Col.  4  :  1),  so  if  any  were  enslaved  unjustly, 
of  course  he  in  this  text  requires  of  the  masters  of  such,  to  give 
them  their  freedom.  Thus  the  apostles  treat  the  slavery  of  that 
day  in  the  same  manner  that  they  treat  the  civil  government ; 
and  say  nothing  more  in  favor  of  the  former,  than  they  say  in  fa- 
vor of  the  latter. 

Besides,  this  argument  from  the  slavery  prevailing  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles,  if  it  prove  anything,  proves  too  much,  and  so 
confutes  itself.  It  proves,  that  we  may  enslave  all  captives  taken 
in  war,  of  any  nation,  and  in  any  the  most  unjust  war,  such  as 
the  wars  of  the  Romans,  which  were  generally  undertaken  from 
the  motives  of  ambition  or  avarice.  On  the  ground  of  this  ar- 
gument we  had  a  right  to  enslave  the  prisoners,  whom  we,  during 
the  late  war,  took  from  the  British  army  ;  and  they  had  the  same 
right  to  enslave  those  whom  they  took  from  us ;  and  so  with  re- 
spect to  all  other  nations. 

5.  It  is  strongly  urged,  that  the  negroes  brought  from  Africa 
are  all  captives  of  war,  and  therefore  are  justly  bought  and  holden 
in  slavery.  This  is  a  principal  argument  always  urged  by  the 
advocates  for  slavery  ;  and  in  a  solemn  debate  on  this  subject,  it 
hath  been  strongly  insisted  on,  very  lately  in  the  British  parlia- 
ment.    Therefore  it  requires  our  particular  attention. 

Captives  in  a  war  just  on  their  part,  cannot  be  justly  ensla- 
ved ;  nor  is  this  pretended.  Therefore  the  captives  who  may 
be  justly  enslaved,  must  be  taken  in  a  war  unjust  on  their  part. 
But  even  on  the  supposition,  that  captives  in  such  a  war  may  be 
justly  enslaved,  it  will  not  follow,  that  we  can  justly  carry  on  the 
slave  trade,  as  it  is  commonly  carried  on  from  the  African  coast. 
In  this  trade  any  slaves  are  purchased,  who  are  onered  for  sale 
whether  justly  or  unjustly  enslaved.  No  inquiry  is  made  whether 
they  were  captives  in  any  war  ;  much  less,  whether  they  were 
captivated  in  a  war  unjust  on  their  part. 


86  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

By  the  most  authentic  accounts,  it  appears,  that  the  wars  in 
general  in  Africa  are  excited  by  the  prospect  of  gain  from  the 
sale  of  the  captives  of  the  war.  Therefore  those  taken  by  the 
assailants  in  such  wars,  cannot  be  justly  enslaved.  Beside  these, 
many  are  kidnapped  by  those  of  the  neighboring  nations  ;  some 
by  their  own  neighbors  ;  and  some  by  their  king  or  his  agents ; 
others  for  debt  or  some  trifling  crime  are  condemned  to  perpetual 
slavery.  But  none  of  these  are  justly  enslaved.  And  the  traders 
make  no  inquiry  concerning  the  mode  or  occasion  of  their  first 
enslavement.  They  buy  all  that  are  offered,  provided  they  like 
them  and  the  price.  So  that  the  plea,  that  the  African  slaves 
are  captives  in  war,  is  entirely  insufficient  to  justify  the  slave 
trade  as  now  carried  on. 

But  this  is  not  all ;  if  it  were  ever  so  true,  that  all  the  negroes 
exported  from  Africa  were  captives  in  war,  and  that  they  were 
taken  in  a  war  unjust  on  their  part ;  still  they  could  not  be  justly 
enslaved.  We  have  no  right  to  enslave  a  private  foe  in  a  state  of 
nature,  after  he  is  conquered.  Suppose  in  a  state  of  nature  one 
man  rises  against  another  and  endeavors  to  kill  him  ;  in  this  case 
the  person  assaulted  has  no  right  to  kill  the  assailant,  unless  it  be 
necessary  to  preserve  his  own  life.  But  in  wars  between  nations, 
one  nation  may  no  doubt  secure  itself  against  another,  by  other 
means  than  the  slavery  of  its  captives.  If  a  nation  be  victorious 
in  the  war,  it  may  exact  some  towns  or  a  district  of  country,  by 
way  of  caution ;  or  it  may  impose  a  fine  to  deter  from  future  in- 
juries. If  the  nation  be  not  victorious,  it  will  do  no  good  to  en- 
slave the  captives  whom  it  has  taken.  It  will  provoke  the  victors, 
and  foolishly  excite  vengeance  which  cannot  be  repelled. 

Or  if  neither  nation  be  decidedly  victorious,  to  enslave  the  cap- 
tives on  either  side  can  answer  no  good  purpose,  but  must  at 
least  occasion  the  enslaving  of  the  citizens  of  the  other  nation, 
who  are  now,  or  in  future  may  be  in  a  state  of  captivity.  Such 
a  practice  therefore  necessarily  tends  to  evil  and  not  good. 

Besides  ;  captives  in  war  are  generally  common  soldiers  or  com- 
mon citizens ;  and  they  are  generally  ignorant  of  the  true  cause 
or  causes  of  the  war,  and  are  by  their  superiors  made  to  believe, 
that  the  war  is  entirely  just  on  their  part.  Or  if  this  be  not  the 
case,  they  may  by  force  be  compelled  to  serve  in  a  war  which 
they  know  to  be  unjust.  In  either  of  these  cases  they  do  not  de- 
serve to  be  condemned  to  perpetual  slavery.  To  inflict  perpet- 
ual slavery  on  these  private  soldiers  and  citizens  is  manifestly  not 
to  do,  as  we  would  wish  that  men  should  do  to  us.  If  we  were 
taken  in  a  war  unjust  on  our  part,  we  should  not  think  it  right  to 
be  condemned  to  perpetual  slavery.     No  more  right  is  it  for  us 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF  SLAVERY.  87 

to  condemn  and  hold  in  perpetual  slavery  others,  who  are  in  the 
same  situation. 

6.  It  is  argued,  that  as  the  Africans  in  their  own  country, 
previously  to  the  purchase  of  them  by  the  African  traders,  are 
captives  in  war ;  if  they  were  not  bought  up  by  those  traders, 
they  would  be  put  to  death  ;  that  therefore  to  purchase  them  and 
to  subject  them  to  slavery  instead  of  death,  is  an  act  of  mercy 
not  only  lawful,  but  meritorious. 

If  the  case  were  indeed  so  as  is  now  represented,  the  purchase 
of  the  negroes  would  be  no  more  meritorious,  than  the  act  of  a 
man,  who,  if  we  were  taken  by  the  Algerines,  should  purchase 
us  out  of  that  slavery.  This  would  indeed  be  an  act  of  benevo- 
lence, if  the  purchaser  should  set  us  at  liberty.  But  it  is  no  act 
of  benevolence  to  buy  a  man  out  of  one  state  into  another  no  bet- 
ter. Nay,  the  act  of  ransoming  a  man  from  death  gives  no  right 
to  the  ransomer  to  commit  a  crime  or  an  act  of  injustice  to  the 
person  ransomed.  The  person  ransomed  is  doubtless  obligated 
according  to  his  ability  to  satisfy  the  ransomer  for  his  expense 
and  trouble.  Yet  the  ransomer  has  no  more  right  to  enslave  the 
other,  than  the  man  who  saves  the  life  of  another  who  was  about 
to  be  killed  by  a  robber  or  an  assassin,  has  a  right  to  enslave  him. 
The  liberty  of  a  man  for  life  is  a  far  greater  good,  than  the  pro- 
perty paid  for  a  negro  on  the  African  coast.  And  to  deprive  a 
man  of  an  immensely  greater  good,  in  order  to  recover  one  im- 
mensely less,  is  an  immense  injury  and  crime. 

7.  As  to  the  pretence,  that  to  prohibit  or  lay  aside  this  trade, 
would  be  hurtful  to  our  commerce  ;  it  is  sufficient  to  ask,  whether 
on  the  supposition,  that  it  were  advantageous  to  the  commerce 
of  Great  Britain  to  send  her  ships  to  these  states,  and  transport 
us  into  perpetual  slavery  in  the  West  Indies,  it  would  be  right 
that  she  should  go  into  that  trade. 

8.  That  to  prohibit  the  slave  trade  would  infringe  on  the  pro- 
perty of  those,  who  have  expended  large  sums  to  carry  on  that 
trade,  or  of  those  who  wish  to  purchase  the  slaves  for  their  plan- 
tations, hath  also  been  urged  as  an  argument  in  favor  of  the  trade. 
But  the  same  argument  would  prove,  that  if  the  skins  and  teeth 
of  the  negroes  were  as  valuable  articles  of  commerce  as  furs  and 
elephant's  teeth,  and  a  merchant  were  to  lay  out  his  property  in 
this  commerce,  he  ought  by  no  means  to  be  obstructed  therein. 

9.  But  others  will  carry  on  the  trade,  if  we  do  not.  So  others 
will  rob,  steal  and  murder,  if  we  do  not. 

10.  It  is  said,  that  some  men  are  intended  by  nature  to  be 
slaves.  If  this  mean,  that  the  author  of  nature  has  given  some 
men  a  license,  to  enslave  others ;  this  is  denied  and  proof  is  de- 


88  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

manded.  If  it  mean,  that  God  hath  made  some  of  capacities  in- 
ferior to  otliers,  and  that  the  last  have  a  right  to  enslave  the  first ; 
this  argument  will  prove,  that  some  of  the  citizens  of  every  coun- 
try, have  a  right  to  enslave  other  citizens  of  the  same  country  ; 
nay,  that  some  have  a  right  to  enslave  their  ovv'n  brothers  and  sis- 
ters. But  if  this  argument  mean,  that  God  in  his  providence 
suffers  some  men  to  be  enslaved,  and  that  this  proves,  that  from 
the  beginning  he  intended  they  should  be  enslaved,  and  made 
them  with  this  intention  ;  the  answer  is,  that  in  like  manner  he 
suffers  some  men  to  be  murdered,  and  in  this  sense,  he  intended 
and  made  them  to  be  murdered.  Yet  no  man  in  his  senses  will 
hence  argue  the  lawfulness  of  murder. 

11.  It  is  further  pretended,  that  no  other  men,  than  negroes, 
can  endure  labor  in  the  hot  climates  of  the  West  Indies  and  the 
southern  states.  But  does  this  appear  to  be  fact  ?  In  all  other 
climates,  the  laboring  people  are  the  most  healthy.  And  I  con- 
fess I  have  not  yet  seen  evidence,  but  that  those  who  have  been 
accustomed  to  labor  and  are  inured  to  those  climates,  can  bear 
labor  there  also.  However,  taking  for  granted  the  fact  asserted 
in  this  objection,  does  it  follow,  that  the  inhabitants  of  those  coun- 
tries have  a  right  to  enslave  the  Africans  to  labor  for  them  ?  No 
more  surely  than  from  the  circumstance,  that  you  are  feeble  and 
cannot  labor,  it  follows,  that  you  have  a  right  to  enslave  your  ro- 
bust neighbor.  As  in  all  other  cases,  the  feeble  and  those  who 
choose  not  to  labor,  and  yet  wish  to  have  their  lands  cultivated, 
are  necessitated  to  hire  the  robust  to  labor  for  them  ;  so  no  rea- 
son can  be  given,  why  the  inhabitants  of  hot  climates,  should  not 
either  perform  their  own  labor,  or  hire  those  who  can  perform  it, 
whether  negroes  or  others. 

If  our  traders  went  to  the  coast  of  Africa  to  murder  the  inhab- 
itants, or  to  rob  them  of  their  property,  all  would  own  that  such 
murderous  or  piratical  practices  are  wicked  and  abominable.  Now 
it  is  as  really  wicked  to  rob  a  man  of  his  liberty,  as  to  rob  him  of 
his  life  ;  and  it  is  much  more  wicked,  than  to  rob  him  of  his  pro- 
perty. All  men  agree  to  condemn  highway  robbery.  And  the 
slave  trade  is  as  much  a  greater  wickedness  than  highway  rob- 
bery, as  liberty  is  more  valuable  than  property.  How  strange  is 
it  then,  that  in  the  same  nation  highway  robbery  should  be  pun- 
ished with  death,  and  the  slave  trade  be  encouraged  by  national 
authority. 

We  all  dread  political  slavery,  or  subjection  to  the  arbitrary 
power  of  a  king  or  of  any  man  or  men  not  deriving  their  author- 
ity from  the  people.  Yet  such  a  state  is  inconceivably  preferable 
to  the  slavery  of  the  negroes.     Suppose  that  in  the  late  war  we 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  SLAVERY.  89 

had  been  subdued  by  Great  Britain  ;  we  should  have  been  taxed 
vvitliout  our  consent.  But  these  taxes  would  have  amounted  to 
but  a  small  part  of  our  property.  Whereas  the  negroes  are  de- 
prived of  all  their  property  ;  no  part  of  their  earnings  is  their 
own  ;  the  whole  is  their  masters.  In  a  conquered  state  we  should 
have  been  at  liberty  to  dispose  of  ourselves  and  of  our  property 
in  most  cases,  as  we  should  choose.  We  should  have  been  free 
to  live  in  this  or  that  town  or  place  ;  in  any  part  of  the  country, 
or  to  remove  out  of  the  country  ;  to  apply  to  this  or  that  busi- 
ness ;  to  labor  or  not ;  and  excepting  a  sufficiency  for  the  taxes, 
to  dispose  of  the  fruit  of  our  labor  to  our  own  benefit,  or  that  of 
our  children,  or  of  any  other  person.  But  the  unhappy  negroes 
in  slavery  can  do  none  of  these  things.  They  must  do  what  they 
are  commanded,  and  as  much  as  they  are  commanded,  on  pain  of 
the  lasii.  They  must  live  where  they  are  placed,  and  must  con- 
fine themselves  to  that  spot,  on  pain  of  death. 

So  that  Great  Britain  in  her  late  attempt  to  enslave  America, 
committed  a  very  small  crime  indeed  in  comparison  with  the 
crime  of  those  who  enslave  the  Africans. 

The  arguments  which  have  been  urged  against  the  slave  trade, 
are  with  little  variation  applicable  to  the  holding  of  slaves.  He 
who  holds  a  slave,  continues  to  deprive  him  of  that  liberty,  which 
was  taken  from  him  on  the  coast  of  Africa.  And  if  it  were  wrong 
to  deprive  him  of  it  in  tiie  first  instance,  why  not  in  the  second  ? 
If  this  be  true,  no  man  hath  a  better  right  to  retain  his  negro  in 
slavery,  than  he  had  to  take  him  from  his  native  African  shores. 
And  every  man  who  cannot  show,  that  his  negro  hath  by  his  vo- 
luntary conduct  forfeited  his  liberty,  is  obligated  immediately  to 
manumit  him.  Undoubtedly  we  should  think  so,  were  we  holden 
in  the  same  slavery  in  which  the  negroes  are ;  and  our  text  re- 
quires us  to  do  to  others,  as  we  would  that  they  should  do  to  us. 

To  hold  a  slave,  who  has  a  right  to  his  liberty,  is  not  only  a  real 
crime,  but  a  very  great  one.  Many  good  christians  have  won- 
dered how  Abraham,  the  father  of  the  faithful,  could  take  Hagar 
to  his  bed  ;  and  how  Sarah,  celebrated  as  an  holy  woman,  could 
consent  to  this  transaction ;  also  how  David  and  Solomon  could 
have  so  many  wives  and  concubines,  and  yet  be  real  saints.  Let 
such  inquire  how  it  is  possible,  that  our  fathers  and  men  now 
alive,  universally  reputed  pious,  should  hold  negro  slaves,  and 
yet  be  the  subjects  of  real  piety  ;  and  whether  to  reduce  a  man, 
who  hath  the  same  right  to  liberty  as  any  other  man,  to  a  state 
of  absolute  slavery,  or  to  hold  him  in  that  state,  be  not  as  great  a 
crime  as  concubinage  or  ornication  ?  I  presume  it  will  not  be 
denied,  that  to  commit  theft  or  robbery  every  day  of  a  man's  life, 


90  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

is  as  great  a  sin  as  to  commit  fornication  in  one  instance.  But 
to  steal  a  man  or  to  rob  him  of  his  liberty  is  a  greater  sin,  than  to 
steal  his  property,  or  to  take  it  by  violence.  And  to  hold  a  man 
in  a  state  of  slavery,  who  has  a  right  to  his  liberty,  is  to  be  every 
day  guilty  of  robbing  him  of  his  liberty,  or  of  manstealing.  The 
consequence  is  inevitable,  that  other  things  being  the  same,  to 
hold  a  negro  slave,  unless  he  have  forfeited  his  liberty,  is  a  greater 
sin  in  the  sight  of  God,  than  concubinage  or  fornication. 

Does  this  conclusion  seem  strange  to  any  of  you  ?  Let  me  en- 
treat you  to  weigh  it  candidly  before  you  reject  it.  You  will  not 
deny,  that  liberty  is  more  valuable  than  property  ;  and  that  it  is 
a  greater  sin  to  deprive  a  man  of  his  whole  liberty  during  life, 
than  to  deprive  him  of  his  whole  property  ;  or  that  man-stealing 
is  a  greater  crime  than  robbery.  Nor  will  you  deny,  that  to  hold 
in  slavery  a  man  ^vho  was  stolen,  is  substantially  the  same  crime 
as  to  steal  him.  These  principles  being  undeniable,  I  leave  it  to 
yourselves  to  draw  the  plain  and  necessary  consequence.  And  if 
your  consciences  shall,  in  spite  of  all  opposition,  tell  you,  that 
while  you  hold  your  negroes  in  slavery,  you  do  wrong,  exceed- 
ingly wrong  ;  that  you  do  not,  as  you  would  that  men  should  do 
to  you  ;  that  you  commit  r,n  in  the  sight  of  God  ;  that  you  daily 
violate  the  plain  rights  of  mankind,  and  that  in  a  higher  degree, 
than  if  you  committed  theft  or  robbery  ;  let  me  beseech  you  not 
to  stifle  this  conviction,  but  attend  to  it  and  act  accordingly,  lest 
you  add  to  your  former  guilt,  that  of  sinning  against  the  light  of 
truth,  and  of  your  own  consciences. 

To  convince  yourselves,  that  your  information  being  the  same, 
to  hold  a  negro  slave  is  a  greater  sin  than  fornication,  theft  or  rob- 
bery, you  need  only  bring  the  matter  home  to  yourselves.  I  am 
wilhng  to  appeal  to  your  own  consciences,  whether  you  would 
not  judge  it  to  be  a  greater  sin  for  a  man  to  hold  you  or  your 
child  during  life  in  such  slavery,  as  that  of  the  negroes,  than  for 
him  to  indulge  in  one  instance  of  licentious  conduct  or  in  one  in- 
stance to  steal  or  rob.  Let  conscience  speak,  and  I  will  submit 
to  its  decision. 

This  question  seems  to  be  clearly  decided  by  revelation.  Ex. 
21:  16,  "  He  that  stealeth  a  man  and  selleth  him,  or  if  he  be 
found  in  his  hand,  he  shall  surely  be  put  to  death."  Thus  death 
is,  by  the  divine  express  declaration,  the  punishment  due  to  the 
crime  of  man-stealing.  But  death  is  not  the  punishment  de- 
clared by  God  to  be  due  to  fornication,  theft  or  robbery  in  com- 
mon cases.  Therefore  we  have  the  divine  authority  to  assert, 
that  man-stealing  is  a  greater  crime  than  fornication,  theft,  or 
robbery.     Now  to  hold  in  slavery  a  man  who  has  a  right  to  lib- 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  SLAVERY.  91 

erty,  is  substantially  the  same  crime  as  to  deprive  him  of  his  lib- 
erty. And  to  deprive  of  liberty  and  reduce  to  slavery,  a  man 
who  has  a  right  to  liberty,  is  man-stealing.  For  it  is  immaterial 
whether  he  be  taken  and  reduced  to  slavery  clandestinely  or  by 
open  violence.  Therefore  if  the  negroes  have  a  right  to  liberty, 
to  hold  them  in  slavery  is  man-stealing,  which  we  have  seen  is, 
by  God  himself,  declared  to  be  a  greater  crime  than  fornication, 
theft  or  robbery. 

Perhaps,  though  this  truth  be  clearly  demonstrable  both  from 
reason  and  revelation,  you  scarcely  dare  receive  it,  because  it 
seems  to  bear  hardly  on  the  characters  of  our  pious  fathers,  who 
held  slaves.  But  they  did  it  ignorantly  and  in  unbelief  of  the  truth  ; 
as  Abraham,  Jacob,  David  and  Solomon  were  ignorant  that  po- 
lygamy or  concubinage  was  wrong.  As  to  domestic  slavery  our 
fathers  lived  in  a  time  of  ignorance  which  God  ivinked  at ;  but 
now  he  commandeth  all  men  everywhere  to  repent  of  this  wick- 
edness, and  to  break  off  this  sin  by  righteousness,  and  this  in- 
iquity by  shelving  mercy  to  the  poor,  if  it  may  be  a  lengthen- 
ing out  of  their  tranquillity.  You  therefore  to  whom  the  present 
blaze  of  light  as  to  this  subject  has  reached,  cannot  sin  at  so 
cheap  a  rate  as  our  fathers. 

But  methinks  I  hear  some  say,  I  have  bought  my  negro  ;  T  have 
paid  a  large  sum  for  him  ;  I  cannot  lose  this  sum,  and  therefore 
I  cannot  manumit  him.  Alas !  this  is  hitting  the  nail  on  the 
head.  This  brings  into  view  the  true  cause  which  makes  it  so 
difficult  to  convince  men  of  what  is  right  in  this  case.  You  re- 
collect the  story  of  Amaziah's  hiring  an  hundred  thousand  men 
of  Israel,  for  an  hundred  talents,  to  assist  him  against  the  Edom- 
ites  ;  and  that  when  by  the  word  of  the  Lord,  he  was  forbidden 
to  take  those  hired  men  with  him  to  the  war,  he  cried  out,  "  But 
what  shall  we  do  for  the  hundred  talents,  which  I  have  given  to 
the  army  of  Israel  ?"  In  this  case,  the  answer  of  God  was,  "  The 
Lord  is  able  to  give  thee  much  more  than  this."  To  apply  this 
to  the  subject  before  us,  God  is  able  to  give  thee  much  more  than 
thou  shalt  lose  by  manumitting  thy  slave. 

You  may  plead  that  you  use  your  slave  well ;  you  are  not  cruel 
to  him,  but  feed  and  clothe  him  comfortably,  etc.  Still  every 
day  you  rob  him  of  a  most  valuable  and  important  right.  And 
a  highwayman,  who  robs  a  man  of  his  money  in  the  most  easy 
and  complaisant  manner,  is  still  a  robber  ;  and  murder  may  be 
effected  in  a  manner  the  least  cruel  and  tormenting ;  still  it  is 
murder. 

Having  now  taken  that  view  of  our  subject,  which  vv'as  pro- 
posed, we  may  in   reflection  see  abundant  reason  to  acquiesce  in 


92  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

the  institution  of  this  society.  If  the  slave  trade  be  unjust,  and 
as  gross  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  mankind,  as  M^ould  be,  if  the 
Africans  should  transport  us  into  perpetual  slavery  in  Africa,  then 
to  unite  our  influence  against  it,  is  a  duty  which  we  owe  to  man- 
kind, to  ourselves  and  to  God  too.  It  is  but  doing  as  we  would 
that  men  should  do  to  us.  Nor  is  it  enough  that  we  have  form- 
ed the  society  ;  we  must  do  the  duties  of  it.  The  first  of  these 
is  to  put  an  end  to  the  slave  trade.  The  second  is  to  relieve 
those  who,  contrary  to  the  laws  of  tiie  country,  are  holden  in 
bondage.  Another  is  to  defend  those  in  their  remaining  legal 
and  natural  rights,  who  are  by  law  holden  in  bondage.  Another 
and  not  the  least  important  object  of  this  society,  I  conceive  to 
be,  to  increase  and  disperse  the  light  of  truth  with  respect  to 
the  subject  of  African  slavery,  and  so  prepare  the  way  for  its 
total  abolition.  For  until  men  in  general  are  convinced  of  the 
injustice  of  the  trade  and  of  the  slavery  itself,  comparatively  lit- 
tle can  be  done  to  effect  the  most  important  purposes  of  the  in- 
stitution. 

It  is  not  to  be  doubted,  that  the  trade  is  even  now  carried  on 
from  this  state.  Vessels  are  from  time  to  time  fitted  out  for  the 
coast  of  Africa,  to  transport  the  negroes  to  the  West  Indies  and 
other  parts.  Nor  will  an  end  be  put  to  this  trade,  without  vigi- 
lance and  strenuous  exertion  on  the  part  of  this  society,  or  other 
friends  of  humanity,  nor  without  a  patient  enduring  of  the  oppo- 
sition and  odium  of  all  who  are  concerned  in  it,  of  their  friends 
and  of  all  who  are  of  the  opinion  that  it  is  justifiable.  Among 
these  we  are  doubtless  to  reckon  some  of  large  property  and  con- 
siderable influence.  And  if  the  laws  and  customs  of  the  country 
equally  allowed  of  it,  many,  and  perhaps  as  many  as  now  plead 
for  the  right  of  the  African  slave  trade,  would  plead  for  the  right 
of  kidnapping  us,  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  and  of  selling 
us  into  perpetual  slavery.  If  then  we  dare  not  incur  the  dis- 
pleasure of  such  men,  we  may  as  well  dissolve  the  society,  and 
leave  the  slave  trade  to  be  carried  on,  and  the  negroes  to  be  kid- 
napped, and  though  free  in  this  state,  to  be  sold  into  perpetual 
slavery  in  distant  parts,  at  the  pleasure  of  any  man,  who  wishes 
to  make  gain  by  such  abominable  practices. 

Though  we  must  expect  opposition,  yet  if  we  be  steady  and 
persevering,  we  need  not  fear,  that  we  shall  fail  of  success.  The 
advantages,  which  the  cause  has  already  gained,  are  many  and 
great.  Thirty  years  ago,  scarcely  a  man  in  this  country  thought 
either  the  slave  trade  or  the  slavery  of  negroes  to  be  wrong. 
But  now  how  many  and  able  advocates  in  private  life,  in  our 
legislatures,  in  Congress,  have  appeared  and  have  openly  and  ir- 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF   SLAVERY.  93 

refiagably  pleaded  the  rights  of  humanity  in  this  as  well  as  other 
instances  ?  Nay,  tlie  great  body  of  the  people  from  New  Hamp- 
shire to  Virginia  inclusively,  have  obtained  such  light,  that  in  all 
those  states  the  further  importation  of  slaves  is  prohibited  by  law. 
And  in  Massachusetts  and  New  Hampshire,  slavery  is  totally 
abolished. 

Nor  is  the  light  concerning  this  subject  confined  to  America. 
It  hath  appeared  with  great  clearness  in  France,  and  produced 
remarkable  effects  in  the  National  Assembly.  It  hath  also  shone 
in  bright  beams  in  Great  Britain.  It  flashes  with  splendor  in  the 
writings  of  Clarkson  and  in  the  proceedings  of  several  societies 
formed  to  abolish  the  slave  trade.  Nor  hath  it  been  possible  to 
shut  it  out  of  the  British  parliament.  This  light  is  still  increas- 
ing, and  in  time  will  effect  a  total  revolution.  And  if  we  judge  of 
the  future  by  the  past,  within  fifty  years  from  this  time,  it  will  be 
as  shameful  for  a  man  to  hold  a  negro  slave,  as  to  be  guilty  of 
common  robbery  or  theft.  But  it  is  our  duty  to  remove  the  ob- 
stacles which  intercept  the  rays  of  this  light,  that  it  may  reach 
not  only  public  bodies,  but  every  individual.  And  when  it  shall 
have  obtained  a  general  spread,  shall  have  dispelled  all  darkness, 
and  slavery  shall  be  no  more  ;  it  will  be  an  honor  to  be  recorded 
in  history,  as  a  society  which  was  formed,  and  which  exerted  it- 
self with  vigor  and  fidelity,  to  bring  about  an  event  so  necessary 
and  conducive  to  the  interests  of  humanity  and  virtue,  to  the 
support  of  the  rights  and  to  the  advancement  of  the  happiness  of 
mankind. 


APPENDIX. 

Some  objections  to  the  doctrine  of  the  preceding  sermon,  have 
been  mentioned  to  the  author,  since  the  delivery  of  it.  Of  these 
it  may  be  proper  to  take  some  notice. 

1.  The  slaves  are  in  a  better  situation  than  that  in  which  they 
were  in  their  own  country  ;  especially  as  they  have  opportunity 
to  know  the  Christian  religion  and  to  secure  the  saving  blessings 
of  it.  Therefore  it  is  not  an  injury,  but  a  benefit  to  bring  them 
into  this  country,  even  though  their  importation  be  accompanied 
and  followed  with  slavery.  It  is  also  said,  that  the  situation  of 
many  negroes  under  their  masters  is  much  better,  than  it  would 
be,  were  they  free  in  this  country  ;  that  they  are  much  better  fed 
and  clothed,  and  are  much  more  happy  ;  that  therefore  to  hold 
them  in  slavery  is  so  far  from  a  crime,  that  it  is  a  meritorious  act. 

Vol.  II.  19 


94  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

With  regard  to  these  pleas,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  every  man 
hath  a  right  to  judge  concerning  his  own  happiness,  and  to  choose 
the  means  of  obtaining  or  promoting  it ;  and  to  deprive  him  of  this 
right  is  the  very  injury  of  which  we  complain  ;  it  is  to  enslave 
him.  Because  we  judge,  that  the  negroes  are  more  happy  in  this 
country,  in  a  state  of  slavery,  than  in  the  enjoyment  of  liberty  in 
Africa,  we  have  no  more  right  to  enslave  them  and  bring  them 
into  this  country,  than  we  have  to  enslave  any  of  our  neighbors, 
who  we  judge  would  be  more  happy  under  our  control,  than  they 
are  at  present  under  their  own.  Let  us  make  the  case  our  own. 
Should  we  believe,  that  we  were  justly  treated,  if  the  Africans 
should  carry  us  into  perpetual  slavery  in  Africa,  on  the  ground 
that  they  judged,  that  we  should  be  more  happy  in  that  state, 
than  in  our  present  situation  ? 

As  to  the  opportunity  which  the  negroes  in  this  country  are 
said  to  have,  to  become  acquainted  with  Christianity ;  this  with 
respect  to  many  is  granted  ;  but  what  follows  from  it  ?  It  would 
be  ridiculous  to  pretend,  that  this  is  the  motive  on  which  they  act 
who  import  them,  or  they  who  buy  and  hold  them  in  slavery. 
Or  if  this  were  the  motive,  it  would  not  sanctify  either  the  trade 
or  the  slavery.  We  are  not  at  liberty  to  do  evil,  that  good  may 
come  ;  to  commit  a  crime  more  aggravated  than  theft  or  robbery, 
that  we  may  make  a  proselyte  to  Christianity.  Neither  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  nor  any  of  his  apostles,  has  taught  us  this  mode  of 
propagating  the  faith. 

2.  It  is  said  that  the  doctrine  of  the  preceding  sermon  imputes 
that  as  a  crime  to  individuals,  which  is  owing  to  the  state  of  so- 
ciety. This  is  granted;  and  what  follows?  It  is  owing  to  the 
state  of  society,  that  our  neighbors,  the  Indians,  roast  their  cap- 
tives ;  and  does  it  hence  follow,  that  such  conduct  is  not  to  be 
imputed  to  the  individual  agents  as  a  crime  ?  It  is  owing  to  the 
state  of  society  in  Popish  countries,  that  thousands  worship  the 
beast  and  his  image  ;  and  is  that  worship  therefore  not  to  be  im- 
puted as  a  crime  to  those,  who  render  it  ?  Read  the  Revelation 
of  St.  John.  The  state  of  society  is  such,  that  drunkenness  and 
adultery  are  very  common  in  some  countries ;  but  will  it  follow, 
that  those  vices  are  innocent  in  those  countries  ? 

3.  If  I  be  ever  so  willing  to  manumit  my  slave,  I  cannot  do  it 
without  being  holden  to  maintain  him,  when  he  shall  be  sick  or 
shall  be' old  and  decrepit.  Therefore  I  have  a  right  to  hold  him 
as  a  slave.  The  same  argument  will  prove,  that  you  have  a  right 
to  enslave  your  children  or  your  parents ;  as  you  are  equally 
holden  to  maintain  them  in  sickness  and  in  decrepit  old  age. 
The  argument  implies,  that  in  order  to  secure  the  money,  which 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  OF   SLAA-^ERY.  93 

you  are  afraid  the  laws  of  your  country  will  some  time  or  other 
oblige  you  to  pay ;  it  is  right  for  you  to  rob  a  free  man  of  his 
liberty  or  be  guilty  of  man-stealing.  On  the  ground  of  this  argu- 
ment every  town  or  parish  obligated  by  law,  to  maintain  its  help- 
less poor,  has  a  right  to  sell  into  perpetual  slavery  all  the  peo- 
ple, who  may  probably  or  even  possibly  occasion  a  public  ex- 
pense. 

4.  After  all,  it  is  not  safe  to  manumit  the  negroes  ;  they  would 
cut  our  throats  ;  they  would  endanger  the  peace  and  government 
of  the  state.  Or  at  least  they  would  be  so  idle,  that  they  would 
not  provide  themselves  with  necessaries  ;  of  course  they  must  Uve 
by  thievery  and  plundering. 

This  objection  requires  a  different  answer,  as  it  respects  the 
northern,  and  as  it  respects  the  southern  states.  As  it  respects 
the  northern,  in  which  slaves  are  so  few,  there  is  not  the  least 
foundation  to  imagine,  that  they  would  combine  or  make  insur- 
rection against  the  government ;  or  that  they  would  attempt  to 
murder  their  masters.  They  are  much  more  likely  to  kill  their 
masters,  in  order  to  obtain  their  liberty,  or  to  revenge  the  abuse 
they  receive,  while  it  is  still  continued,  than  to  do  it  after  the 
abuse  hath  ceased,  and  they  are  restored  to  their  liberty.  In  this 
case,  they  w'ould  from  a  sense  of  gratitude,  or  at  least  from  a 
conviction  of  the  justice  of  their  masters,  feel  a-strong  attachment, 
instead  of  a  murderous  disposition. 

Nor  is  there  the  least  danger,  but  that  by  a  proper  vigilance 
of  the  selectmen,  and  by  a  strict  execution  of  the  laws  now  exist- 
ing, the  negroes  might  in  a  tolerable  degree  be  kept  from  idleness 
and  pilfering. 

All  this  hath  been  verified  by  experiment.  In  Massachusetts, 
all  the  negroes  in  the  commonwealth  were  by  their  new  constitu- 
tion liberated  in  a  day  ;  and  none  of  the  ill  consequences  objected 
followed  either  to  the  commonwealth  or  to  individuals. 

With  regard  to  the  southern  states,  the  case  is  different.  The 
negroes  in  some  parts  of  those  states  are  a  great  majority  of  the 
whole,  and  therefore  the  evils  objected  would,  in  case  of  a  general 
nianumission  at  once,  be  more  likely  to  take  place.  But  in  the 
first  place  there  is  no  prospect,  that  the  conviction  of  the  truth 
exhibited  in  the  preceding  discourse,  will  at  once,  take  place  in 
the  minds  of  all  the  holders  of  slaves.  The  utmost  that  can  be 
expected,  is  that  it  will  take  place  gradually  in  one  after  another, 
and  that  of  course  the  slaves  will  be  gradually  manumitted.  There- 
fore the  evils  of  a  general  manumission  at  once,  are  dreaded 
without  reason. 

If  in  any  state  the  slaves  should  be  manumitted  in  considerable 


96  INJUSTICE  AND  IMPOLICY  OF  THE 

numbers  at  once,  or  so  that  the  number  of  free  negroes  should 
become  large ;  various  measures  might  be  concerted  to  prevent 
the  evils  feared.  One  I  beg  leave  to  propose :  Tiiat  overseers 
of  the  free  negroes  be  appointed  from  among  themselves,  who 
shall  be  empowered  to  inspect  the  morals  and  management  of  the 
rest,  and  report  to  proper  authority  those  who  are  vicious,  idle 
or  incapable  of  managing  their  own  affairs,  and  that  such  author- 
ity dispose  of  them  under  proper  masters  for  a  year  or  other  term, 
as  is  done,  perhaps  in  all  the  states,  with  regard  to  the  poor  white 
people  in  like  manner  vicious,  idle  or  incapable  of  management. 
Such  black  overseers  would  naturally  be  ambitious  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  their  office  ;  they  would  in  many  respects  have 
much  more  influence  than  white  men  with  their  countrymen  ; 
and  other  negroes  looking  forward  to  the  same  honorable  distinc- 
tion, would  endeavor  to  deserve  it  by  their  improvement  and  good 
conduct. 

But  after  all,  this  whole  objection,  if  it  were  ever  so  entirely 
founded  on  truth  ;  if  the  freed  negroes  would  probably  rise  against 
their  masters,  or  combine  against  government ;  rests  on  the  same 
ground,  as  the  apology  of  the  robber,  who  murders  the  man  whom 
he  has  robbed.  Says  the  robber  to  himself,  I  have  robbed  this 
man,  and  now  if  I  let  him  go  he  will  kill  me,  or  he  will  complain 
to  authority  and  I  shall  be  apprehended  and  hung.  I  must  there- 
fore kill  him.  There  is  no  other  way  of  safety  for  me.  The 
coincidence  between  this  reasoning  and  that  of  the  objection  un- 
der consideration,  must  be  manifest  to  all.  And  if  this  reasoning 
of  the  robber  be  inconclusive  ;  if  the  robber  have  no  right  on  that 
ground  to  kill  the  man  whom  he  hath  robbed  ;  neither  have  the 
slave  holders  any  more  right  to  continue  to  hold  their  slaves. 
If  the  robber  ought  to  spare  the  life  of  the  man  robbed,  take  his 
own  chance  and  esteem  himself  happy  if  he  can  escape  justice  ; 
so  the  slave  holders  ought  immediately  to  let  their  slaves  go  free, 
treat  them  with  the  utmost  kindness,  by  such  treatment  endeavor 
to  pacify  them  with  respect  to  past  injuries,  and  esteem  them- 
selves happy,  if  they  can  compromise  the  matter  in  this  manner. 

In  all  countries  in  which  the  slaves  are  a  majority  of  the  in- 
habitants, the  masters  lie  in  a  great  measure  at  the  mercy  of  the 
slaves,  and  may  most  rationally  expect  sooner  or  later,  to  be  cut 
off,  or  driven  out  by  the  slaves,  or  to  be  reduced  to  the  same 
level  and  to  be  mingled  with  them  into  one  common  mass.  This 
I  think  is  by  ancient  and  modern  events  demonstrated  to  be 
the  natural  and  necessary  course  of  human  affairs.  The  hewers 
of  wood  and  drawers  of  water  among  the  Israelites,  the  Helots 
among  the  Lacedemonians,  the  slaves  among  the  Romans,  the 


SLAVE  TRADE,  AND  SLAVERY.  97 

villains  and  vassals  in  most  of  the  kingdoms  of  Europe  under  the 
feudal  system,  have  long  since  mixed  with  the  common  mass  of 
the  people,  and  shared  the  common  privileges  and  honors  of  their 
respective  countries.  And  in  the  French  West-Indies  the  Mu- 
lattoes  and  free  negroes  are  already  become  so  numerous  and 
powerful  a  body,  as  to  be  allowed  by  the  National  Assembly  to 
enjoy  the  common  rights  and  honors  of  free  men.  These  facts 
plainly  show,  what  the  whites  in  the  West-Indies  and  the  South- 
ern States  are  to  expect  concerning  their  posterity,  that  in  time 
it  will  infallibly  be  amalgamated  with  the  slave  population,  or  else 
they  must  quit  the  country  to  the  Africans  whom  they  have  hith- 
erto holden  in  bondage. 


9* 


SERMON  VI. 


ALL  DIVL\E  TRUTH  PROFITABLE  * 

Acts  20 :  20. — And  how  I  kept  back  nothing  that  was  profitable  unto  you. 

These  words  are  a  part  of  the  farewell  discourse  of  Paul,  to 
the  elders  of  the  church  at  Ephesus.  In  his  journey  to  Jerusa- 
lem, he  sent  for  them  to  Miletus.  When  they  met  him  there, 
he  appealed  to  them  as  to  the  manner  in  which  he  had  executed 
the  ministry  among  them  ;  that  he  had  been  with  them  at  all 
times,  serving  the  Lord  with  all  humility,  and  with  many  temp- 
tations ;  that  in  his  preaching  he  had  kept  back  nothing  which 
was  profitable  to  them,  but  had  declared  to  them  all  the  counsel 
of  God.  Thus  by  comparing  one  part  of  the  context  with  an- 
other, we  learn  that  all  the  counsel  of  God  is  profitable  and  may 
be  preached  profitably  to  the  hearers.  The  counsel  of  God  is 
the  revealed  will  or  truth  of  God.  Therefore  our  text  taken  with 
the  context,  aflfords  this  doctrine : 

That  all  divine  ti'uth  may  he  profitably  preached  to  mankind 
in  general. 

Doubtless  the  church  at  Ephesus  was  made  up  chiefly  of  com- 
mon men,  men  of  common  abilities,  and  of  no  more  than  com- 
mon literary  improvement ;  and  if  Paul  preached  all  the  counsel 
of  God  profitably  to  them,  without  doubt  the  same  may  be  done 
with  like  profit  to  mankind  in  general,  provided  they  be  in  like 
manner  disposed  to  make  a  profitable  use  of  it.  I  shall  consider 
this  doctrine  with  regard  to  several  particular  divine  truths,  espe- 
cially those,  which  some  imagine  cannot  be  profitably  preached 
to  people  in  general. 

1.  The  divine  existence  and  character  and  the  'mode  of  the 
divine  subsistence,  so  far  as  it  is  revealed  in  scripture.  That  it 
is  profitable  to  preach  the  existence  of  the  one  only  living  and 
true  God,  and  to  preach  his  attributes  of  infinite  power,  know- 
ledge, wisdom,  holiness,  justice,  goodness  and   truth,  it  is  presu- 

*  Preached  at  Hamden,  Jan.  11,  1792,  at  the  ordination  of  the  Rev.  Dan 
Bradley,  to  the  pastoral  chai'ge  of  the  first  church  in  Whitestown,  N.  Y. 
Publislied  at  New  Haven, 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  99 

med  none  will  deny.  The  more  clearly  his  character  and  attri- 
butes are  exhibited,  the  more  clearly  will  be  seen  the  object  and 
foundation  of  all  piety  ;  and  the  stronger  will  be  the  motive  to 
the  inward  emotions  and  to  the  external  practice  of  piety. 
Therefore  such  preaching  must  be  profitable.  Nor  is  the  preach- 
ing of  the  mode  of  the  divine  subsistence  revealed  in  scripture, 
incapable  of  affording  profit ;  otherwise  why  was  it  revealed  ? 
The  scripture  tells  us  "  There  are  three  that  bear  record  in  hea- 
ven ;  the  Father,  the  Word,  and  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  these 
three  are  one  ;"  that  the  Son  or  ''  the  Word  was  in  the  begin- 
ning, was  with  God  and  was  God ;"  that  "  he  is  the  true  God 
and  eternal  life  ;"  that  "  he  is  in  the  form  of  God  and  counts  it 
no  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God ;"  and  therefore  all  divine 
names,  attributes  and  works  are  ascribed,  and  divine  worship  is 
rendered  to  him,  equally  as  to  the  Father.  These  things  argue 
that  he  is  equally  God,  as  the  Father. 

When  our  Lord  claimed  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  and  said  that 
he  and  his  Father  were  one,  the  Jews  certainly  understood  him 
to  claim  real  divinity,  or  to  '•  make  himself  God."  Therefore 
they  took  up  stones  to  stone  him  as  a  blasphemer  ;  and  this  sup- 
posed blasphemy  was  the  ground  of  the  charge  on  which  they 
condemned  him  and  besought  Pilate  that  he  might  be  crucified; 
see  Matt.  26:  63.  John  19:  7.  Undoubtedly  he  was  a  blasphe- 
mer, if  being  a  mere  man,  he  claimed  to  be  God  and  equal  with 
him.  In  exalting  himself  to  an  equality  with  God,  he  degraded 
God  to  a  level  with  himself.  Now  that  every  blasphemer  should 
suflfer  death  was  expressly  ordained  by  the  law  of  God  delivered 
by  Moses,  and  by  that  law  the  Jews  were  bound.  Therefore  if 
Jesus  were  not  truly  God  and  equal  with  the  Father,  he  was  just- 
ly crucified,  either  as  a  blasphemer,  if  he  claimed  and  meant  to 
claim,  real  divinity  ;  or  because  he  foolishly  and  obstinately  neg- 
lected to  explain  himself,  if  he  did  not  mean  to  claim  real  divini- 
ty, when  it  was  manifest  that  his  adversaries  understood  him  to 
claim  it. 

That  the  Holy  Ghost  also  is  truly  God,  appears,  as  he  is  ex- 
pressly called  God  ;  as  we  are  baptized,  and  the  evangelical  bene- 
diction is  pronounced,  equally  in  his  name,  as  in  the  name  of  the 
Father  and  of  the  Son  ;  as  he  is  one  of  the  three  that  bear  record 
in  heaven,  which  three  are  declared  to  be  one ;  and  as  divine 
W'orks  are  ascribed  to  him. 

These  three  are  not  only  all  divine  and  equal  ;  but  in  opposi- 
tion to  the  ancient  and  exploded  doctrine  of  Sabellianism,  they 
are  three  distinct  persons,  and  not  merely  three  characters  of  the 
same  person.     Any  man  may  sustain  and  act  in  three  characters ; 


100  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

and  according  to  this  account  of  the  divine  subsistence,  there  is 
no  more  a  Trinity  in  God,  than  there  is  or  may  be  in  every  man. 
It  is  said  that  "  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  be- 
gotten Son,"  etc. ;  that  "  God  sent  his  Son  into  the  world,  that 
the  world  through  him  might  be  saved ;"  and  Christ  says,  "  I 
must  work  the  works  of  him  that  sent  me."  And  of  him  it  is 
said,  "  Thou  art  my  Son,  this  day  have  I  begotten  thee."  And 
that  Christ  is  often  called  God's  Son,  his  servant,  his  messenger, 
his  angel,  his  shepherd,  his  fellow,  etc.  I  need  not  inform  you. 
In  like  manner  the  Father  is  said  to  give  and  to  send  the  Holy 
Ghost.  But  it  is  absurd  to  say  a  person  sends  himself,  is  a  Son 
to  himself,  begat  himself,  is  a  servant,  a  messenger,  an  angel,  a 
shepherd,  a  fellow  to  himself.  "  In  the  beginning  was  the  Word, 
and  the  Word  was  with  God,  and  the  Word  was  God,  the  same 
was  in  the  beginning  with  God.''  But  how  trifling  would  it  be 
to  say,  that  a  man  is  with  himself! 

Suppose  a  man  sustains  the  three  characters  of  a  merchant,  a 
justice  of  the  quorum  and  a  colonel  of  the  militia ;  would  it  be 
proper  to  say,  that  the  merchant  sent  the  justice  to  court  to  try 
a  cause  ?  or  that  the  merchant  and  the  justice  sent  the  colonel  to 
review  his  regiment  ?  or  that  the  justice  and  the  colonel  sent  the 
merchant  to  purchase  goods  ? 

As  to  the  plea,  that  a  man  cannot  act  in  three  characters  at 
the  same  time,  but  that  God  can  ;  it  affords  no  relief  to  the  diffi- 
culty. The  difficulty  is,  that  this  scheme  admits  of  no  other 
Trinity  in  God,  than  is  or  may  be  in  any  man,  and  that  on  this 
hypothesis,  the  Deity  as  to  a  Trinity,  or  triplicity  of  subsistence, 
is  not  distinguished  from  man.  The  answer  now  given  is  that 
God  is  distinguished  from  man,  in  that  he  acts  in  three  charac- 
ters at  the  same  time,  which  man  cannot  do.  But  this  gives  no 
satisfaction  ;  for  no  mere  man  can  do  three  things  at  once  in  the 
same  character,  and  he  is  as  capable  of  doing  three  things  at  once 
in  three  different  characters,  as  he  is  of  doing  three  things  at 
once  in  the  same  character ;  and  the  Deity  is  no  more  distin- 
guished from  man  in  his  ability  to  do  three  things  at  once  in 
three  characters,  than  in  his  ability  to  do  three  things  at  once  in 
one  and  the  same  character.  Besides  ;  the  plea  now  under  con- 
sideration supposes  the  Trinity  to  consist,  not  as  the  Sabellian 
scheme  supposes,  in  the  three  characters  which  God  sustains  ; 
for  if  the  sustaining  of  three  characters  constituted  the  Trinity, 
any  man  is  or  may  be  a  trinity  ;  but  it  supposes  it  to  consist  in 
the  divine  ability  to  do  at  once  three  things  belonging  to  three 
different  characters  or  offices ;  which  is  to  place  the  Trinity  in 
the  ability  to  do  three  things  at  once.     For  he  who  can  do  any 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  101 

three  things  at  once,  can  doubtless  as  easily  at  once  do  three 
things  in  three  different  characters,  as  at  once  do  three  things  in 
one'^and  the  same  character.  But  this  makes  the  Trinity  and 
tlie  divine  omnipotence  to  be  one  and  the  same  thing. 

Now  that  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  profitable  will  appear, 
if  we  consider  how  necessary  the  knowledge  of  it  is  to  the  un- 
derstanding of  the  gospel,  or  the  scheme  of  redemption  by  Jesus 
Christ.  We  cannot  understand  this  scheme  unless  we  know  who 
the  Savior  is.  Nor  can  we  rationally  and  with  comfort  and  sat- 
isfaction believe  and  trust  in  him,  unless  we  know  his  sufficiency 
as  a  Savior  ;  his  sufficiency  in  power  to  subdue  our  corruptions, 
to  sanctify  our  souls,  to  conquer  satan  and  all  our  spiritual  foes 
and  to  uphold  us  to  the  end  ;  his  sufficiency  in  wisdom  to  disap- 
point the  devices  of  om-  grand  adversary  and  of  all  men  who  are 
employed  in  his  service,  and  to  make  us  wise  unto  salvation  ; 
his  sufficiency  in  goodness  and  grace  to  forgive  our  sins,  to  watch 
over  us  continually  for  our  preservation,  to  intercede  for  us  with 
the  Father,  and  to  dispense  to  us  grace  to  help  in  time  of  need ; 
and  the  sufficiency  of  his  merit  and  the  price  of  his  redemption, 
or  his  propitiatory  sacrifice,  to  atone  for  all  our  sins,  and  to  pro- 
cure our  acceptance  with  the  Father.  Now,  if  he  be  a  divine 
person  his  sufficiency  in  these  and  all  other  respects  appears  at 
once.  But  if  he  were  not  a  divine  person,  might  we  not  doubt, 
yea  positively  deny  his  sufficiency  ?  How  should  a  finite  price 
redeem  us  from  an  endless  or  infinite  punishment  ?  How  should 
a  finite  atonement  satisfy  for  crimes  deserving  a  punishment 
without  end  ?  If  Christ  were  a  mere  creature,  we  might  well  dis- 
believe either  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  endless  punishment,  or 
the  sufficiency  of  the  Redeemer.  No  wonder  therefore,  that 
those  who  disbelieve  the  divinity  of  Christ,  do  generally,  if  not 
universally,  disbelieve  the  endless  misery  of  those  who  die  im- 
penitent. 

2.  The  doctrine  of  the  divine  decrees  which  teaches  that  God 
hath  foreordained  whatsoever  cometh  to  pass,  is  a  profitable  doc- 
trine. It  would  seem  unaccountable  that  God  should  build  such 
a  vast  structure,  as  that  of  the  created  universe,  and  not  fix  the 
scheme  of  it  in  his  own  mind,  before  he  began  ;  but  should  enter 
upon  it  without  design,  without  plan,  without  system.  How 
could  this  be  reconciled  with  even  human  wisdom  ;  much  more 
with  divine,  which  is  infinite  ?  If  a  human  architect,  about  to 
build  should  collect  materials  of  various  kinds  and  dimensions  ; 
but  should  collect  them  without  design  and  without  determining 
their  proper  uses  and  applications ;  we  should  all  agree  to  con- 
demn him  either  for  his  ignorance  or  his  negligence. 


102  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

Thus  we  conceive  concerning  all  human  works ;  and  thus  we 
conceive  concerning  all  the  divine  works  throughout  the  material 
and  irrational  creation.  And  the  only  reason  why  we  do  not 
agree  to  conceive  in  like  manner  concerning  the  works  of  God 
in  the  rational  creation,  is  the  idea,  that  if  God  were  to  determine 
beforehand  all  events  in  this  part  of  his  kingdom,  it  would  be  in- 
consistent with  the  liberty  of  rational  creatures.  If  by  liberty  be 
meant  freedom  from  all  certainty  or  certain  and  fixed  futurity  of 
the  state  and  actions  of  rational  creatures  ;  I  grant  that  the  divine 
decrees  are  utterly  inconsistent  with  hberty.  But  such  a  freedom 
from  certainty  is  perfect  uncertainty,  contingence  or  chance  ;  and 
that  an  action  may  in  this  sense  be  free,  it  must  be  uncaused  and 
happen  by  pure  contingence.  To  say,  that  it  is  not  uncaused, 
but  caused  by  the  rational  creature  himself,  whose  action  it  is, 
aflfords  no  satisfaction  ;  because,  in  the  first  place,  if  it  be  so,  it 
must  be  caused  by  an  antecedent  action,  and  for  the  same  reason 
that  antecedent  action  must  be  caused  by  another  action  antece- 
dent to  that,  and  so  on  in  an  infinite  series  ;  which  is  absurd.  In 
the  second  place,  to  cause  our  own  actions  will  contribute  nothing 
toward  liberty,  unless  we  cause  them  freely,  that  is,  in  the  sense 
now  under  consideration,  contingently  and  by  pure  chance.  To 
cause  them  any  otherwise,  is  to  cause  them  under  an  established 
certainty  or  moral  necessity.  But  what  advantage  it  affords 
toward  liberty,  to  cause  our  own  actions  by  pure  contingence, 
more  than  to  become  the  subjects  of  them  by  pure  contingence 
without  our  own  causality,  seems  hard  to  be  conceived.  Indeed 
as  to  liberty  and  accountableness,  they  appear  to  be  one  and  the 
same  thing.  And  no  wonder  this  scheme  of  liberty  is  inconsis- 
tent with  the  divine  decrees  ;  for  it  is  equally  inconsistent  with 
any  Providence  in  the  moral  world,  with  any  wise  divine  govern- 
ment of  rational  creatures,  with  any  final  cause  of  their  creation, 
and  implies  that  they  are  equally  delivered  up  to  chance,  as  Epi- 
curus' atoms  were  in  their  eternal  floating  in  the  infinite  inane. 

But  if  giving  up  this  idea  of  liberty,  we  mean  by  that  word, 
not  a  freedom  from  all  certainty  and  causality  from  without,  but 
a  freedom  from  all  involuntary  necessity  and  restraint  ;*  divine 
decrees  are  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  liberty.  Thus  Judas 
chose  to  betray  his  Lord,  and  by  the  very  term  he  chose  it  vol- 
untarily ;  it  was  an  act  of  his  will,  and  in  it  he  was  free  from  all 
involuntary  necessity  ;  of  course  he  was  free  in  that  act ;  for  this 
is  the  definition  of  freedom  now  given.  And  surely  a  divine  de- 
cree, that  he  should  act  voluntarily  and  without  an  involuntary 

*  By  involuntary  necessity  and  restraint  I  mean  a  necessity  aiid  restraint 
to  which  the  will  is  or  may  be  opposed. 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  103 

necessity,  did  not  bring  it  to  pass,  that  he  acted  involuntarily  and 
under  the  influence  of  an  involuntary  necessity.  He  was  also 
free  to  have  not  betrayed  his  Lord,  and  to  have  chosen  not  to 
betray  him,  as  he  voluntarily  omitted  this  choice,  and  was  under 
no  involuntary  restraint  from  it.  The  Jews  did  not  receive  the 
gospel ;  yet  they  were  free  to  receive  it,  as  they  voluntarily  reject- 
ed it,  and  were  free  from  all  involuntary  restraint  from  receiving 
it ;  for  this  is  the  very  definition  of  liberty  in  case  of  omission  of 
an  action.  And  the  divine  decree,  that  they  should  be  free  from 
this  restraint,  did  not  bring  it  to  pass  that  they  should  not  be  free 
from  it,  or  subject  them  to  it,  which  it  must  do,  to  be  at  all  in- 
consistent with  their  liberty. 

The  divine  decrees  are  so  far  from  opposing  or  destroying  hu- 
man liberty,  that  they  secure  it ;  as  they  make  it  certain  that  a 
man  will  act  or  not  act  voluntarily  and  without  any  involuntary  ne- 
cessity or  restraint,  so  they  make  it  certain,  that  he  will  be  free. 

Some  profess  to  believe  firmly  both  absolute  decrees  and  hu- 
man liberty  ;  and  at  the  same  time  profess  not  to  be  able  to  see 
their  consistence.  The  cause  of  this  apparent  inconsistence  must 
doubtless  be,  that  such  persons  entertain  the  erroneous  idea  of  lib- 
erty, that  it  consists  in  contingence.  Only  let  them  define  to 
themselves  liberty,  and  they  will  be  able  to  resolve  their  own 
doubts.  If  they  mean  by  it  a  liberty  of  contingence  or  chance, 
there  is,  as  was  before  observed,  a  perfect  inconsistence  between 
human  liberty  and  divine  decrees.  But  if  they  mean  by  it  free- 
dom from  involuntary  necessity  and  restraint,  there  is  not  the 
least  inconsistence. 

If  any  one  should  say,  that  this  5reedom  from  involuntary  ne- 
cessity and  restraint  does  not  contain  the  whole  of  human  liberty, 
because  beasts  possess  it  as  they  act  spontaneously,  yet  they  have 
not  liberty  ;  I  beg  leave  to  ask  such  a  person,  what  right  he  has 
to  say,  that  beasts  have  not  liberty,  even  on  the  supposition,  that 
liberty  implies  contingence  and  self-determination  ?  How  does 
it  appear,  but  that  they  act  as  much  by  chance  as  men  do,  and 
produce  one  act  of  will  in  their  own  mind  by  another,  as  really 
as  men  do  ?  It  is  true,  they  are  not  accountable  creatures  ;  but 
this  is  because  they  have  not  sufficient  intelligence  or  reason ; 
and  does  not  appear  to  be  owing  to  the  want  of  either  contingence 
or  self-determination  ;  or  rather  of  contingence  alone  ;  because 
self-determination  will  not  imply  any  degree  of  that  liberty  which 
I  am  opposing,  unless  it  be  exercised  with  perfect  contingence. 

This  doctrine  of  the  divine  decrees  is  profitable,  as  it  shows  us 
God's  supremacy  and  sovereignty,  and  our  entire  dependence  ; 
as  it  teaches  us,  that  nothing  comes  to  pass  which  is  not  wisely 


]04  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

permitted  and  ordered  ;  and  that  God  will  finally  bring  all  things 
to  a  happy  issue ;  since  otherwise  he  would  not  have  decreed 
them.  This  doctrine  also  happily  tends  to  reconcile  us  to  the 
dispensations  of  Providence,  and  to  make  us  patient  and  content 
ed  under  all  its  allotments.  Surely  we  ought  to  be  contented, 
since  everything  takes  place  according  to  the  wise,  holy,  good 
and  perfect  decree  of  God. 

3.  That  there  is  a  universal  providence  of  God  naturally  fol- 
lows from  the  divine  decrees.  This  is  but  the  execution  of  God's 
decrees.  That  the  divine  providence  extends  to  every  the  most 
minute  event,  the  scriptures  teach,  in  that  they  assure  us  that  "  a 
sparrow  falleth  not  to  the  ground,  without  our  heavenly  Father, 
and  that  the  very  hairs  of  our  heads  are  all  numbered." 

This  view  of  providence  is  useful,  as  it  brings  God  constantly 
into  our  view.  The  events  of  providence  are  the  language  of  the 
Deity  to  us.  All  prosperous  events  teach  us  his  goodness  and 
call  for  our  gratitude.  All  adverse  events  are  chastisements  for 
our  sins,  and  call  for  our  humiliation.  Thus  the  proper  use  of 
divine  providence  is,  to  live  as  seeing  him  who  is  invisible.  This 
doctrine  as  well  as  the  divine  decrees,  tends  to  reconcile  us  to  all 
events  which  befall  us.  As  the  judge  of  all  the  earth  will  do 
right,  so  every  event  of  his  providence  is  perfectly  right,  as  or- 
dered by  him  ;  and  as  connected  with  the  whole  system,  it  is  the 
best  that  possibly  could  take  place ;  and  the  whole  system  of 
creation  and  providence  taken  together  is  the  best  possible. 
Otherwise  how  shall  we  reconcile  it  with  the  perfections  of  God  ? 
If  God  have  chosen  a  meaner  system  instead  of  a  more  excellent 
one,  it  seems  it  must  have  been  owing  to  a  defect  of  power,  of 
wisdom,  or  of  goodness. 

4.  That  we  are  fallen  creatures,  totally  depraved  by  nature, 
is  a  clear  and  useful  doctrine  of  scripture. 

The  scripture  assures  us,  that  "  every  imagination  of  the 
thoughts  of  man's  heart  is  only  evil  continually  ;"  that  by  nature 
men  are  "  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins  ;"  that  "  there  is  none  that 
seeketh  after  God ;"  and  that  "  there  is  no  fear  of  God  before 
their  eyes."  Surely  if  we  had  any  principle  of  moral  goodness 
in  us  by  nature,  it  would  dispose  us  to  seek  after  God  at  least. 
And  if  we  have  no  fear  of  God,  we  can  have  no  moral  goodness, 
for  the  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  first  beginning  of  wisdom. 

The  same  is  evident  from  reason  also.  Every  man  in  every 
moral  act  either  loves  God  supremely  or  loves  some  other  object 
supremely.  If  any  man  love  God  supremely,  he  is  entitled  to 
the  promises  of  the  gospel  and  of  eternal  life.  But  it  is  not  pre- 
tended by  those  who  deny  the  total  depravity  of  human  nature, 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  105 

that  any  man  in  a  natural  state  loves  God  supremely,  or  is  en- 
titled to  the  promises  of  eternal  life.  Their  scheme  is,  that  man- 
kind by  nature  are  the  subjects  of  a  defective  kind  of  virtue,  and 
that  in  this  very  respect  it  is  defective,  that  they  do  not  love  God 
supremely,  but  to  some  inferior  degree  only,  preferring  other 
things  before  him  ;  and  that  when  any  are  brought  to  love  God 
supremely,  they  are  regenerate.  Now  if  these  things  be  so  ;  if 
man  do  not  by  nature  love  God  supremely ;  of  course  in  all  his 
moral  acts  he  loves  some  other  object  or  objects  supremely.  But 
to  love  other  objects  supremely,  and  to  set  them  in  our  esteem 
and  affections  above  the  Deity  is  positive  sin.  This  is  the  sin  of 
the  selfish  man,  the  worldling,  the  miser,  the  drunkard,  the 
debauchee,  etc.  And  if  all  men  by  nature,  in  all  their  moral 
acts,  love  other  objects  more  than  God ;  then  all  their  moral  acts 
are  positively  sinful,  and  all  men  are  by  nature  totally  depraved. 
Thus  this  doctrine  is  clearly  taught  both  by  scripture  and  reason. 

The  distinction  which  some  endeavor  to  make  in  this  case  be- 
tween negative  and  positive  sin,  pleading  that  though  all  the 
moral  acts  of  the  unregenerate  are  negatively  sinful,  since  they 
do  not  love  God  supremely  as  they  ought ;  yet  all  their  moral 
acts  are  not  positively  sinful ;  appears  to  be  groundless.  For 
whoever  does  not  love  God  supremely  is  guilty  not  only  of  neg- 
ative sin  in  not  loving  God  supremely,  but  of  positive  sin  in  actu- 
ally loving  some  other  object  supremely,  and  in  preference  to  the 
Deity.  And  if  we  say,  that  this  is  a  negative  sin  only,  we  might 
as  well  say  that  the  drunkard  commits  negative  sin  only,  in  his 
supreme  love  of  his  cups.  The  plea  is,  that  the  unregenerate  do 
not  love  the  objects  of  time  and  sense  too  much,  but  love  God  too 
little ;  and  that  if  they  loved  God  enough,  their  love  to  the  ob- 
jects of  time  and  sense  would  do  no  harm,  and  would  be  no  sin. 
But  this  same  reasoning  will  equally  prove,  that  the  drunkard 
is  guilty  of  no  positive  sin.  For  if  he  loved  God  supremely,  his 
love  to  his  cups  would  do  no  harm  and  would  be  no  sin  ;  be- 
cause he  would  restrain  his  appetite  within  due  bounds,  and  in- 
dulge it  no  further  than  is  consistent  with  God's  will  and  subser- 
vient to  his  glory.  The  bare  involuntary  appetite  for  strong  drink 
is  neither  sin  nor  virtue,  any  more  than  the  bare  appetite  for  food  ; 
but  the  voluntary  indulgence  of  it  is  a  positive  voluntary  act ; 
and  in  the  drunkard,  as  he  loves  strong  drink  supremely,  is  a 
sinful  act ;  and  consequently  is  a  positive  sin.  Now  if  the 
drunkard  were  to  become  the  subject  of  supreme  love  to  God,  he 
would  no  longer  be  a  drunkard,  and  would  no  longer  love  strong 
drink  supremely,  but  would  govern  his  appetite  by  the  divine  law. 
Therefore  now  his  love  or  appetite  for  strong  drink  is  no  sin 

Vol.  II.  10 


106  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

truly,  and  the  reason  is  that  he  does  not  now  exercise  this  love 
nor  indulge  this  appetite  as  he  did  before,  and  from  the  nature  of 
the  case,  it  is  impossible  he  should ;  as  now  he  is  supposed  to  be 
a  very  different  man  and  to  love  God  supremely.  His  involuntary 
appetite  or  craving  after  strong  drink  may  for  a  time  remain  for 
substance  the  same  as  before ;  but  it  is  absurd  and  contradictory 
to  suppose  that  he  should  indulge  it,  as  he  did  before.  So  far  as 
he  does  thus  indulge  it,  he  does  not  love  God  supremely. 

Now  all  the  moral  acts  of  the  unregenerate,  as  in  them  they 
equally  prefer  other  objects  before  God,  are  as  really  positive  acts 
and  positively  sinful  too,  as  the  drunkard's  voluntary  love  of 
strong  drink,  and  his  consent  to  indulge  his  appetite.  And  as 
the  latter  is  without  dispute  a  positive  sin,  so  are  the  former. 

When  it  is  said,  that  the  unregenerate  do  not  love  the  things 
of  the  world  too  much  ;  but  love  God  too  little  ;  if  the  meaning 
be,  that  they  do  not  love  those  things  too  much,  provided  they 
loved  and  sought  them  in  a  manner  agreeable  to  the  will  of  God 
and  in  subserviency  to  his  glory ;  this  is  granted.  But  to  love 
the  world  thus,  is  to  love  God  supremely ;  and  to  say,  that 
the  unregenerate  do  not  love  God,  with  a  supreme  affection 
which  is  too  strong,  when  it  is  granted  on  all  hands,  that  they  do 
not  love  him  supremely  at  all,  is  mere  trifling.  If  the  meaning 
be,  that  the  unregenerate  do  not  love  the  things  of  the  world 
with  too  strong  a  direct  and  ultimate  affection,  making  a  supreme 
good  of  them  ;  this  is  not  true.  This  love  of  the  things  of  the 
world  is  the  same  with  the  supreme  love  of  them  ;  and  they  cer- 
tainly do  love  them  supremely.  Every  man  must  have  some  su- 
preme object ;  and  in  this  case,  there  is  no  medium  between  God 
and  the  creature.  And  those  who  do  not  love  God  supremely, 
of  course  love  the  creature  supremely  ;  and  all  supreme  love  of 
the  creature  is  too  strong  ;  as  this  kind  of  love  of  the  creature 
ought  not  to  be  indulged  or  exercised  at  all. 

It  is  said  that  the  unregenerate  do  not  love  the  world  more 
than  the  regenerate  do.  But  this  is  not  true,  if  by  loving  the 
world  be  meant  setting  their  hearts  upon  it,  placing  their  happi- 
ness in  it,  depending  on  it,  or  in  one  word  loving  it  supremely. 
If  the  meaning  of  the  expression  be,  that  the  unregenerate  do  not 
take  more  pleasure  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  good  things  of  life, 
than  the  regenerate  do ;  this  may  be  true  ;  and  there  is  no  sin 
in  taking  pleasure  in  the  enjoyments  of  the  world,  provided  it  be 
according  to  the  will  of  God. 

Nor  is  the  doctrine  of  total  depravity  less  useful  than  it  is  true. 
It  is  certainly  useful,  that  we  know  our  real  state  and  characters. 
They  that  are  whole  need  not  a  physician,  but  they  that  are  sick. 


AH,  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  107 

The  first  step  toward  a  remedy,  is  the  investigation  of  our  dis- 
ease. A  knowledge  of  our  depravity  prepares  the  way  for  con- 
viction, humiliation,  repentance,  faith  in  the  Mediator,  and  other 
christian  graces.  But  if  we  misconceive  concerning  our  own 
characters,  the  mistake  may  be  fatal. 

5.  The  strictness  and  terrors  of  the  divine  law  are  important, 
and  the  teaching  of  them  profitable.  So  strict  is  the  divine  law, 
that  it  allows  of  no  sin  in  external  action,  in  word  or  in  thought ; 
and  so  terrible  as  to  threaten  an  endless  punishment  for  every 
violation.  This  is  indeed  dreadful ;  yet  if  it  be  a  reality,  it  is 
most  necessary  to  be  known,  and  the  knowledge  of  it  may  be  most 
profitable.  The  greater  the  danger,  the  more  necessary  is  the 
knowledge  of  it,  and  the  stronger  the  motive  to  escape. 

6.  That  there  is  salvation  for  mankind  through  Christ,  and 
through  him  only,  is  a  most  important  and  profitable  doctrine. 
The  scriptures  abundantly  teach  both  these  particulars.  "  Christ 
came  to  seek  and  to  save  them  that  were  lost."  "  Through  his 
name  whosoever  believeth  in  him,  shall  receive  remission  of  sins." 
"  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that 
believeth  not,  shall  be  damned."  "  Other  foundation  can  no 
man  lay,  than  that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  "  There  is  no 
other  name  under  heaven  given  among  men,  whereby  we  must 
be  saved."  Thus  there  is  provided  by  infinite  grace  an  all-suffi- 
cient Savior,  who  is  every  way  able  to  save  to  the  uttermost,  all 
who  come  to  him  ;  and  at  the  same  time  we  are  shut  up  to  the 
faith  of  Christ. 

I  am  sensible,  that  many  have  flattered  themselves,  that  they 
may  obtain  pardon  on  the  ground  of  their  bare  repentance,  with- 
out an  atonement.  But  this  is  directly  contrary,  not  only  to  scrip- 
ture, but  to  reason  too.  The  voice  of  scripture  we  have  in  the 
text  just  now  quoted  ;  and  the  voice  of  reason  coincides  with  that 
of  scripture.  If  the  penitent  transgressor  be  released  from  pun- 
ishment on  his  repentance,  he  is  released  either  on  the  footing  of 
justice  or  of  grace.  If  on  the  footing  oi  justice,  there  is  no  par- 
don in  the  case,  and  it  is  absurd  to  talk  of  it.  And  on  this  hy- 
pothesis repentance  is  either  the  complete  righteousness  required 
by  the  law  transgressed,  or  it  is  the  complete  penalty  of  it.  If  it 
were  the  complete  righteousness,  it  would  preclude  all  transgres- 
sion ;  which  is  contrary  to  the  supposition  and  the  very  nature  of 
the  case,  which  implies  that  there  is  a  transgression  of  the  law. 
It  would  also  preclude  itself,  as  repentance  cannot  have  any  foun- 
dation without  trangression.  Nor  is  repentance  the  complete 
penalty  of  the  law.  That  is  a  curse  ;  but  repentance  is  a  bless- 
ing.    That  is  an  evil  on  the  whole ;    something  which  on  the 


108  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

whole  is  no  advantage,  but  a  disadvantage  to  the  subject ;  where- 
as repentance  is  on  the  whole  no  evil,  no  disadvantage  to  the  sub- 
ject, but  an  inconceivable  advantage.  Therefore  it  is  not  the 
curse  of  the  law  ;  and  the  penitent  is  without  an  atonement ;  li- 
able to  that  curse,  and  cannot  be  released  from  it  on  the  footing 
of  justice. 

If  the  penitent  be  by  justice  entitled'to  impunity,  it  will  follow, 
that  transgression  or  sin  is  no  moral  evil.  Moral  evil  deserves 
some  punishment  which  is  a  real  evil.  But  as  has  been  observed, 
repentance  is  no  real  evil,  but  a  good,  a  benefit,  a  privilege  ;  and 
if  transgression  deserve  nothing  but  repentance,  it  deserves  no 
real  evil,  and  no  real  punishment ;  but  a  privilege,  a  benefit  in- 
stead of  a  punishment ;  and  therefore  is  no  moral  evil.  Moral 
evil  is  hateful  in  itself,  or  on  account  of  its  native  tendency.  It 
therefore  deserves  to  be  hated,  and  may  justly  be  hated  by  God 
in  every  instance  of  its  existence  ;  and  this  just  hatred  of  it  may 
justly  be  manifested  in  both  words  and  actions  ;  and  such  mani- 
festation of  hatred  by  God  is  punishment.  But  if  transgression 
do  not  in  every  instance  deserve  this  manifestation  of  divine  ha- 
tred, it  does  not  deserve  the  hatred  itself,  and  therefore  is  not  a 
moral  evil. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  objected,  that  transgression  does  not  indeed 
deserve  any  manifestation  of  divine  hatred  after  repentance, 
though  it  do  deserve  it  before  repentance.  To  this  I  answer ; 
that  if  transgression  deserve  before  repentance  both  hatred  and 
the  manifestation  of  it,  and  do  not  deserve  it  after  repentance ; 
it  must  be  because  repentance  is  the  full  punishment  of  it,  and 
all  the  evil  which  it  deserves.  Yet  this,  as  we  have  just  seen, 
cannot  be  true,  as  repentance  is  on  the  whole  no  real  evil  at  all, 
but  a  very  great  benefit ;  and  if  this  be  what  transgression  de- 
serves, it  deserves  a  reward  and  not  a  punishment,  and  therefore 
is  rather  a  moral  good  than  a  moral  evil.*  Moral  evil  is  an  in- 
fringement on  the  good  of  the  divine  system  ;  that  public  good 
therefore  requires  reparation  or  security  against  future  infringe- 
ment of  the  like  kind,  whether  by  the  transgressor  or  others. 
This  is  due  to  the  public.  But  repentance  makes  no  reparation  ; 
it  gives  no  such  security.  If  it  did,  it  would  be  a  full  satisfac- 
tion for  transgression,  and  would  be  all  the  punishment  which  it 
deserves,  or  would  be  the  penalty  and  curse  of  the  divine  law. 
But  tiiis  will  not  be  pretended.  And  as  repentance  is  no  repara- 
tion or  satisfaction  for  damage  done  to  the  public  good,  if  the 
public  good  require  no  reparation  after  repentance,  it  requires 
none  before ;  and  this  proves  that  no  damage  hath  been  done  to 

*  A  virtue,  a  meritorious  act,  instead  of  a  vice  or  crime. 


ALL  DIVINE    TRUTH   PROFITABLE.  109 

the  public,  or  no  moral  evil  hath  been  committed  by  the  trans- 
gression of  the  law. 

Or  if  the  penitent  transgressor  be  supposed  to  be  released  from 
punishment  on  the  footing  of  grace,  this  cannot  be  admitted  by 
even  the  infinite  goodness  and  grace  of  God,  unless  it  be  consis- 
tent with  the  general  good  of  his  kingdom,  which  is  the  universe. 
But  on  the  present  supposition  of  the  release  of  the  penitent  on 
the  footing  of  grace,  he  does  not  deserve  release,  but  justly  de- 
serves punishment.  Yet  he  does  not  deserve  punishment,  unless 
the  general  good  require  it.  For  when  there  is  no  atonement 
made,  no  man  deserves  any  further  punishment,  than  is  necessa- 
ry to  the  general  good.  Therefore  if  the  penitent  do  on  the  foot- 
ing of  justice  deserve  punishment,  the  general  good  requires  that 
he  be  punished.  But  if  it  require  this,  it  does  not  and  cannot 
at  the  same  time  require  or  admit  that  he  be  pardoned. 

So  that  on  either  supposition,  there  can  be  no  pardon  dispensed 
on  bare  repentance.  If  justice  require  that  it  be  dispensed  on 
this  ground,  it  is  improperly  called  pardon  ;  there  neither  is  nor 
can  be  any  pardon  in  the  case ;  and  sin  or  transgression  on  this 
supposition  deserves  no  punishment,  and  therefore  is  no  moral 
evil.  If  goodness  require  that  pardon  be  dispensed  on  bare  re- 
pentance ;  the  general  good  requires  the  same.  If  the  general 
good  require  the  pardon  of  the  penitent  on  the  bare  ground  of 
his  repentance,  he  does  not  deserve  punishment,  and  there  can 
be  no  pardon  in  his  release.  From  the  same  supposition  it  fol- 
lows, that  transgression  is  no  moral  evil.  Surely  that  is  no  mo- 
ral evil,  which  deserves  no  punishment,  and  which  the  general 
good  does  not  require  should  be  punished.  Therefore  as  long 
as  the  transgression  of  the  law  of  God  is  a  moral  evil,  so  long  the 
transgressor  cannot  be  released  from  punishment  on  the  ground 
of  his  repentance  only. 

If  these  observations  be  just,  do  they  not  afford  us  conclusive 
arguments  against  the  essential  part  of  both  the  Socinian  and 
Deistic  system  ?  Both  these  systems  rest  on  the  foundation,  that 
divine  goodness  requires  the  pardon  of  the  transgressor  in  conse- 
quence of  his  bare  repentance.  If  this  foundation  be  removed, 
both  these  systems  will  inevitably  fall  to  the  ground. 

Thus  we  see  the  necessity  and  usefulness  of  the  evangelical 
doctrine  of  forgiveness  through  an  atonement.  It  is  necessary 
to  our  comfort,  and  even  to  any  hope ;  as  otherwise  we  should 
be  in  a  state  of  absolute  desperation.  But  what  an  all-sufficient 
and  glorious  foundation  of  hope  is  there  laid  for  us  in  the  atone- 
ment of  Jesus  Christ !  The  doctrine  of  the  atonement  therefore 
is  useful  to  raise  our  hope,  to  lead  us  to  repentance,  to  fix  our 

10* 


110  ALL,  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

faith,  to  inspire  us  with  gratitude,  and  to  enhven  within  us  every 
christian  grace. 

7.  Regeneration  is  another  very  profitable  doctrine  of  the  gos- 
pel. This  doctrine  implies  that  by  nature  we  are  destitute  of  all 
spiritual  good  ;  that  all  holiness  in  man  is  produced  by  a  special 
and  supernatural  influence  of  the  Divine  Spirit ;  and  that  there 
is  no  natural  or  stated  connection  between  any  exercises,  doings 
or  strivings  of  the  natural  man  and  true  holiness. 

As  to  particular  modes  of  explaining  this  doctrine,  wise  and 
good  men  have  differed.  Some  hold  that  a  new  principle  or  pro- 
pensity may  be  implanted  in  the  heart  long  before  any  holy  emo- 
tions or  affections  take  place  ;  some,  that  affections  begin  imme- 
diately in  consequence  of  the  implantation  of  the  new  principle  ; 
some  that  there  is  properly  no  new  principle  created ;  but  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  immediately  produces  holy  aflections  in  regenera- 
tion, and,  thenceforward  produces  them  in  a  stated  manner  ac- 
cording to  a  divine  constitution.  But  these  speculations  seem 
not  to  be  essential  to  the  doctrine.  If  we  hold  that  in  regenera- 
tion a  special,  and  supernatural  influence  of  the  Holy  Ghost  pro- 
duces holy  acts,  emotions  or  affections  in  the  heart ;  and  that  this 
influence  once  given  is  given  statedly,  producing  according  to  a 
divinely  established  order  the  like  holy  acts  ;  this  seems  to  be  the 
substance  of  this  important  doctrine. 

Regeneration  properly  means  the  divine  agency  put  forth  to 
produce  the  new  creature.  Under  the  operation  of  this  agency 
the  subject  is  passive.  Sometimes  however  the  word  regenera- 
tion is  used  to  include  the  turning  of  the  man  from  sin  to  holiness, 
which  is  more  properly  called  conversion  ;  and  in  this  the  man 
is  active.  In  regeneration  used  in  the  large  sense,  the  subject  is 
both  passive  and  active  ;  passive  as  he  is  the  subject  of  the  divine 
operation,  and  active  in  the  effect  of  this  operation,  which  is  an 
actual  turning  from  sin  to  God  and  his  service. 

Much  has  been  said  concerning  regeneration  hy  light,  and  by 
moral  suasion.  If  they  who  use  this  language  mean  no  more, 
than  that  men  are  not  regenerated  in  paganism,  and  so  without 
the  light  and  motives  of  the  gospel ;  and  that  under  the  gospel 
they  are  commonly  regenerated  in  consequence  of  attention  to 
the  gospel  and  of  awakening  and  conviction  in  view  of  the  truths 
and  motives  of  it ;  and  that  the  regenerate  turn  from  sin  to  God 
in  view  of  those  truths  and  motives,  though  not  by  them  as  the 
efficient  cause  ;  I  shall  not  oppose  them,  though  I  think  their 
phraseology  in  many  instances  leads  to  a  different  understanding. 
In  the  sense  now  explained,  we  may  understand  the  following 
texts,  "  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  with  the  word  of  truth  ;" 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  Ill 

"  Being  born  again,  not  of  corruptible  seed,  but  incorruptible,  by 
the  word  of  God,  which  hveth  and  abideth  forever  ;"  "  I  have  be- 
gotten you  through  the  gospel,"  etc. 

But  if  they  mean,  that  by  the  motives  of  the  gospel  sinners  are 
persuaded  to  repent  and  return  to  God ;  and  that  no  special  or 
supernatural  influence  is  used  to  this  effect ;  this  implies  a  denial 
of  the  entire  depravity  of  human  nature,  and  that  the  human  heart 
is  by  nature  well  disposed  to  duty,  and  that  all  that  is  wanting 
to  regeneration  is  proper  information. 

Or  if  the  advocates  for  regeneration  by  light  mean,  that  a  su- 
pernatural and  merely  intellectual  light,  not  consisting  in  holy  af- 
fection nor  implying  it,  is  first  let  into  the  mind,  and  that  then 
this'  light  changes  the  heart ;  this  implies,  that  men  by  nature 
have  not  sufficient  capacity  or  faculty  of  understanding  to  know 
their  duty  ;  and  that  therefore  their  natural  intellect  must  be  su- 
pernaturally  increased  ;  and  that  as  soon  as  this  is  increased,  they 
see  their  duty,  and  their  hearts  at  once  comply  with  it.  This 
also,  you  see,  implies  a  denial  of  entire  depravity,  and  supposes 
that  the  human  heart  is  by  nature  inclined  to  receive  and  comply 
with  the  truth,  but  is  hindered  by  an  insurmountable  weakness 
of  the  intellect,  a  weakness  not  depending  on  the  will.  And  is 
this  indeed  so  ?  Is  the  mathematician  rendered  by  regeneration 
more  capable  of  diving  deeply  into  the  abyss  of  mathematics  ? 
the  philosopher,  of  tracing  the  influence  of  the  various  principles 
and  powers  of  matter  and  motion  ?  or  the  politician,  of  under- 
standing the  interests  of  his  own  and  foreign  nations  ?  This  will 
not  be  pretended.  Yet  this  would  necessarily  be  the  case,  if  in 
regeneration  there  were  an  increase  of  the  natural  faculty  of  in- 
tellect. 

The  opposite  sentiment  to  this  of  regeneration  by  light  is  that 
of  regeneration  by  the  immediate  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
This  is  abundantly  taught  in  scripture,  "  As  many  as  received 
him^  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God  ;  even  to 
them  that  believe  on  his  name ;  which  were  born  not  of  blood, 
nor  of  the  will  of  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man,  but  of  God." 
"  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh  is  flesh ;  and  that  which  is  born 
of  the  Spirit  is  Spirit." 

The  objection  to  this  idea  of  regeneration  by  immediate  divine 
influence  is,  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  our  liberty  ;  and  that  this 
influence  is  a  physical  influence,  implying  an  irresistible  necessi- 
ty. The  answer  to  this  objection  is,  that  if  by  liberty  be  meant 
a  freedom  from  all  certainty  and  certain  causality,  or  which  is  the 
same,  a  liberty  of  contingence  ;  it  is  granted,  that  this  idea  of  re- 
generation is  totally  inconsistent  with  liberty.     And  this  idea  of 


1 12  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

liberty  must  be  meant  by  those  who  make  this  objection,  if  they 
mean  anything  to  the  purpose.  Self-determination,  of  which 
they  say  so  much,  implies  no  liberty  inconsistent  with  an  imme- 
diate and  efficacious  influence  of  the  Spirit,  unless  it  be  exerci- 
sed contingently.  Self-determinate  acts  produced  by  a  necessa- 
ry causality,  may,  as  to  liberty,  be  as  well  produced  by  the  im- 
mediate influence  of  the  Spirit,  as  by  any  other  necessary  causal- 
ity, even  though  it  were  the  causality  of  the  mind  itself.  But  if 
by  liberty  be  meant  freedom  from  all  involuntary  necessity  and 
restraint,  there  is  no  inconsistence  between  regeneration  by  the 
immediate  influence  of  the  Spirit  and  human  liberty.  Because 
in  regeneration  the  man  is  made  "  willing  in  the  day  of  God's 
power." 

Besides ;  regeneration  by  immediate  influence  of  the  Spirit  is 
no  more  inconsistent  with  human  liberty,  in  any  sense  of  the 
term,  than  regeneration  by  moral  suasion.  If  regeneration  be 
effected  by  moral  suasion,  it  is  effected  by  moral  motives ;  and 
under  the  influence  of  those  motives  the  man  is  passive,  as  pas- 
sive as  under  the  influence  of  the  divine  Spirit ;  and  the  causal 
influence  of  those  motives  by  which  regeneration  is  effected,  is 
as  necessary,  irresistible,  indefeasible  and  unfrustrable,  as  the  im- 
mediate influence  of  the  Spirit,  when  that  regenerates.  For  no 
greater  power  or  influence  of  the  Spirit  is  supposed  or  pleaded 
for,  than  is  requisite  and  sufficient  to  the  effect ;  and  that  influ- 
ence of  motives  which  is  requisite  and  entirely  sufficient  to  the 
effect,  is  supposed  in  regeneration  by  moral  suasion.  Where 
then  is  there  more  liberty  in  the  one  case  than  in  the  other  ?  The 
influence  of  moral  suasion  is  supposed  to  be  the  real  cause  of  re- 
generation, and  therefore  to  be  sufficient  and  effectual  to  the  pro- 
duction of  it.  To  say,  that  the  influence  of  moral  suasion  is  not 
the  real  and  effectual  cause  of  regeneration,  is  to  give  up  the 
doctrine  of  regeneration  by  moral  suasion. 

As  to  what  is  said  concerning  a  physical  influence  in  regen- 
eration, if  by  this  be  intended  the  immediate  influence  of  the  di- 
vine Spirit,  we  avow  it ;  and  it  appears  to  be  no  more  inconsis- 
tent with  liberty,  in  any  sense  of  the  term,  than  what  is  called  the 
moral  influence  of  moral  suasion.  Nor  is  the  distinction  be- 
tween a  physical  and  moral  influence,  if  the  latter  be  effectual, 
of  any  use  or  importance  in  this  subject,  so  far  as  liberty  is  con- 
cerned ;  and  a  physical  influence,  so  far  from  being  inconsistent 
with  human  liberty,  absolutely  secures  and  establishes  it,  if  by 
liberty  we  mean  spontaneity  and  freedom  from  involuntary  ne- 
cessity and  restraint ;  or,  which  comes  to  the  same,  unless  by 
liberty  we  mean  absolute  contingence. 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  113 

That  the  doctrine  of  regeneration  is  profitable,  is  manifest,  as 
it  is  so  instructive,  teaching  us  what  we  are  by  nature  and  what 
we  must  be  by  divine  grace  ;  as  it  is  so  practical  and  experimen- 
tal ;  and  as  it  so  happily  tends  to  awaken  the  sinner,  to  animate 
the  saint,  to  humble  all  and  lead  all  to  self-examination. 

8.  That  it  is  the  indispensable  duty  of  unregenerate  sinners 
immediately  to  repent  and  comply  with  the  gospel,  is  also  a  pro- 
fitable doctrine.  You  are  sensible,  brethren,  that  some  deny  this. 
They  plead,  that  sinners  are  in  themselves  unable  to  repent  and 
comply  with  the  gospel ;  that  therefore  it  is  not  their  duty  ;  and 
that  in  their  unregenerate  state  they  are  bound  in  duty  to  use  the 
means  of  grace  only.  But  nothing  is  plainer  from  the  scriptures, 
than  that  it  is  the  immediate  duty  of  sinners  to  repent  and  be- 
lieve on  Christ.  The  language  of  scripture  is,  "  Repent,  for  the 
kingdom  of  heaven  is  at  hand  ;"  "  Repent,  and  be  converted, 
that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out ;"  "  This  is  his  commandment, 
that  ye  should  believe  on  the  name  of  his  Son  Jesus  Christ." 
And  the  sum  of  Paul's  preaching  was  "  repentance  toward  God 
and  faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ." 

The  same  is  plain  from  reason  too.  If  repentance  be  not  a  du- 
ty, impenitence  is  no  sin  ;  and  if  impenitence  be  no  sin,  neither 
is  any  affection  of  heart  or  want  of  afliection  ;  such  as  unbelief, 
enmity  against  God,  selfishness,  malice,  etc.  And  if  no  affection 
of  heart  be  sinful,  neither  is  any  external  action  proceeding  from 
such  affection.  Thus  this  hypothesis  will  shut  all  sin  out  of  the 
world. 

As  to  the  inability  of  the  sinner  to  repent  and  believe  saving- 
ly, it  is  wholly  of  the  moral  kind  ;  it  is  voluntary,  and  of  course 
his  will  is  not  at  all  opposed  to  it,  nor  will  be  opposed  to  it,  while 
it  remains  and  so  far  as  it  remains.  For  as  soon  and  as  far  as 
the  will  opposes  this  inability,  the  inability  itself  ceases.  Inas- 
much therefore  as  this  inability  consists  wholly  in  an  indisposi- 
tion or  unwillingness  to  repent  and  comply  with  the  gospel,  it  is 
no  excuse  for  impenitence  and  unbelief,  any  more  than  the  un- 
willingness of  the  drunkard  to  forsake  his  cups,  is  an  excuse  for 
his  intemperance ;  or  the  unwillingness  of  the  indolent  to  labor, 
is  an  excuse  for  their  idleness. 

This  doctrine  is  exceedingly  profitable,  as  it  so  immediately 
tends  to  conviction,  which  is  the  ordinary  antecedent  of  conver- 
sion. Indeed  it  seems  to  be  absolutely  necessary  to  conviction 
and  to  repentance.  For  how  can  a  man  be,  according  to  truth, 
convinced  of  the  sin  of  impenitence,  and  repent  of  that  sin  if  it 
be  no  sin  at  all  ?  If  repentance  be  not  the  duty  of  the  unregen- 
erate, no  man  regenerate  or  unregenerate  can  consistently  with 


114 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 


truth  repent  of  the  impenitence,  unbehef,  alienation  of  heart  from 
Christ,  enmity  against  God,  selfishness,  or  want  of  true  love  to 
men,  of  which  he  is  or  ever  was  the  subject  while  unregenerate. 
How  stupifying  and  hardening  therefore  is  the  doctrine,  which 
teaches  that  it  is  not  the  duty  of  the  unregenerate  to  repent  im- 
mediately with  repentance  unto  life  and  cordially  to  comply  with 
the  gospel  ?  Although  then  the  means  of  grace  be  useful  and 
important ;  yet  to  preach  up  those  only  ;  or  to  preach  so  that  the 
hearers  receive  the  idea,  that  the  use  of  means  is  the  whole  duty 
to  which  they  are  now  obligated  ;  is  to  take  the  most  direct  way 
to  settle  them  down  in  security,  and  to  prevent  conviction,  con- 
version, repentance  and  reconciliation  to  God. 

9.  Justification  hy  faith  alone  is  a  most  important  and  profit- 
able doctrine.  What  relates  to  justification  by  our  own  repen- 
tance and  good  works  has  been  already  considered.  I  shall  now 
endeavor  to  state  the  proper  idea  of  justification. 

(1)  It  is  not  the  bestowment  of  personal  righteousness.  This 
is  sanctification,  which  is  begun  in  regeneration  and  thencefor- 
ward progressively  carried  on. 

(2)  It  is  not  declaring  the  believer  to  be  just,  or  to  stand  right 
with  respect  to  the  divine  law.  Some  have  expressed  them- 
selves thus  on  this  important  subject ;  but  surely  without  due 
consideration.  For  God  can  never  declare  a  man  to  be  just,  un- 
less he  be  in  reality  just ;  nor  can  he  ever  declare  him  to  stand 
right  with  respect  to  the  divine  law  unless  he  do  in  fact  stand 
right  with  respect  to  it.  And  if  he  be  just  and  do  stand  right 
with  respect  to  the  law,  he  may  be  justified  on  the  footing  of  the 
law  ;  and  there  is  no  need  of  the  gospel  or  of  the  grace  or  the 
atonement  of  it,  to  his  justification. 

(3)  It  is  not  reckoning,  considering,  or  viewing  the  believer 
as  just  or  standing  right  with  the  law,  or  as  having  a  legal  right 
to  justification.  The  believer  is  indeed  not  only  acquitted  from 
condemnation,  but  entitled  to  the  favor  of  God  and  eternal  life 
in  glory.  But  he  is  not  thus  acquitted,  etc.  as  standing  right  with 
the  law,  but  as  a  sinner,  a  trangressor  of  the  law,  and  therefore  is 
acquitted  entirely  on  the  ground  of  free  grace  through  the  atone- 
ment ;  which  is  a  ground  totally  different  from  that  of  the  law 
and  its  righteousness.  Neither  does  God  reckon,  consider  or 
view  any  man  as  being  what  he  really  is  not ;  unless  by  those 
words  be  meant,  not  any  mental  acts  of  God,  but  mere  external 
conduct  and  treatment. 

(4)  Justification  positively  consists  in  treating  the  believer  in 
many  important  respects,  as  though  he  were  just,  and  had  in  fact 
never  transgressed  the  law.     He  is  as  effectually  acquitted  from 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  115 

the  condemnation  of  the  law,  and  entitled  to  the  favor  of  God  here 
and  hereafter,  as  if  he  had  always  perfectly  obeyed  the  law.  Thus 
lie  is  treated  as  a  just  person  ;  as  if  he  stood  right  with  the  law, 
and  as  if  he  had  the  complete  righteousness  of  it,  by  his  own  per- 
sonal obedience ;  but  all  this  is  wholly  for  tiie  sake  of  Christ  and 
his  atonement.  This  is  justification,  and  the  whole  of  it.  This 
is  the  imputation  of  righteousness  to  the  believer.  This  is  the 
imputation  to  him  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ. 

Tiiat  this  is  an  important,  profitable  and  comforting  doctrine, 
it  is  presumed  none  among  us  will  deny. 

10.  That  we  are  accountable  to  God  is  another  profitable  doc- 
trine. Nothing  is  more  clear  from  scripture  than  this.  "He 
hath  appointed  a  day  in  which  he  will  judge  the  world  in  right- 
eousness ;"  and  the  whole  process  of  that  day  is  described.  The 
objection  to  this  doctrine  is,  How  can  we  be  accountable,  if  we 
be  dependent  ?  If  all  good  actions  proceed  from  a  divine  influ- 
ence, and  all  evil  actions  from  original  depravity  ?  If  we  act  not 
independently  and  from  ourselves  ?  or  if  we  do  not  cause  our 
own  actions  both  external  and  mental  ?  To  this  I  answer  :  If 
by  causing  our  own  mental  actions  be  meant  any  more  than  that 
we  are  the  subjects  of  them,  it  must  be  meant  that  we  cause 
them  by  an  antecedent  act.  But  for  the  same  reason,  we  are 
not  accountable  for  that  antecedent  act,  unless  we  cause  that  too 
by  an  act  still  preceding  that ;  and  so  on  till  we  come  to  the 
first  act  of  which  we  ever  were  the  subjects.  And  of  this  we 
cannot  be  the  cause  ;  for  by  the  supposition  it  is  the  first  act, 
and  therefore  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  we  should  have  put 
forth  a  prior  act,  by  which  to  cause  it.  Now  if  we  be  not  ac- 
countable for  that  first  act,  as  not  having  caused  it  ourselves,  we 
are  not  accountable  for  any  one  of  the  subsequent  series.  For 
this  which  we  cause  not,  causes  all  the  rest.  They  all  depend 
on  that  cause  which  operates  independently  of  us  ;  and  therefore 
on  the  ground  of  this  objection,  we  are  no  more  accountable  for 
any  of  them,  than  we  are  for  those  acts  which  proceed  from  a 
divine  influence  or  from  original  depravity.  Besides  ;  if  we 
cause  our  own  volitions,  we  doubtless  cause  them  freely  and  not 
necessarily  ;  otherwise  we  may  as  well  not  cause  them  at  all. 
But  the  word  fi'eely  in  this  connection,  if  it  be  at  all  to  the  pur- 
pose, must  be  used  in  opposition  to  a  real  and  absolute  certainty, 
and  must  mean  contingently  and  by  mere  chance.  But  to  cause 
our  own  volitions  by  pure  contingence  is  no  more  favorable  to 
accountableness,  than  to  become  the  subjects  of  them  by  im- 
mediate contingence,  without  any  antecedent  and  contingent  ex- 
ertion of  our  own.     And  why  we  should   be  more  accountable 


116  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

for  actions  arising  from  pure  contingence,  than  for  those  which 
are  produced  in  us  by  some  external  cause  or  motive,  is  hard  to 
be  conceived.  It  is  certain  by  the  very  terms  that  we  are  no 
more  the  causes  of  the  former  than  of  the  latter. 

The  plain  dictate  of  reason  is,  that  we  are  accountable  when- 
ever we  deserve  praise  or  blame  ;  and  that  we  do  deserve  praise 
or  blame,  whenever  we  exercise  tempers  or  have  volitions  either 
good  or  evil,  benevolent  or  malicious,  kind  or  selfish  ;  and  this 
without  any  inquiry  whether  those  volitions  happened  by  pure 
contingence,  or  proceeded  from  some  cause  whether  within  or 
without  the  mind. 

Thus  I  have  endeavored  to  illustrate  our  doctrine,  that  all  di- 
vine truth  may  be  profitably  preached  to  mankind,  by  a  particu- 
lar consideration  of  some  of  the  most  important  divine  truths ; 
especially  those  truths,  the  preaching  of  which  many  are  apt  to 
think  is  not  profitable.  And  if  these  be  profitable,  we  may  safely 
conclude  the  same  concerning  all  other  divine  truths. 

If  this  doctrine  be  true,  we  see  how  groundless  the  idea  of 
some  is,  who  imagine  that  there  are  certain  doctrines  in  scripture 
which  are  not  to  be  preached,  and  cannot  be  preached  with 
profit  to  the  hearers.  If  this  were  fact,  then  Paul,  whose  preach- 
ing was  so  profitable,  did  not  preach  those  doctrines.  Yet  he 
tells  us,  that  he  declared  all  the  counsel  of  God.  And  as  his 
preaching  was  under  the  influence  of  inspiration,  we  may  be 
sure  that  this  kept  him  from  everything  unprofitable. 

Having  thus  finished  what  was  proposed  in  the  doctrinal  part 
of  our  discourse,  we  proceed  to  the  usual  addresses,  to  the  pastor 
elect,  and  to  the  church  or  its  representatives  present. 

I.  To  the  pastor  elect. 

My  dear  Sir, — You  are  now  entering  on  a  most  weighty,  ex- 
tensive, and  useful  employment.  May  you  undertake  it  from 
right  motives,  and  discharge  it  with  success  and  acceptance  by 
your  master  and  your  judge.  That  you  may  thus  discharge  it, 
you  must  be  and  approve  yourself  to  be  a  real  christian,  a  pru- 
dent man  and  a  man  of  knowledge  in  the  line  of  your  profession. 

1.  You  must  be  and  approve  yourself  to  be,  a  real  christian. 
To  maintain  your  character  in  this  respect,  you  must  live  Chris- 
tianity, live  in  the  exercise  of  the  graces  of  Christianity  and  in 
the  practice  of  the  external  duties  of  it.  Be  careful  to  cultivate 
more  and  more  divine  grace  in  your  own  soul.  Grow  in  grace 
and  in  the  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ.  Your 
growth  in  grace  will  show  itself,  not  affectedly,  but  naturally, 
easily  and  beautifully.  Thus  you  will  acquiVr^  in  a  greater  and 
greater  degree  the  confidence  of  your  people.     Thus  will  your 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  117 

light  shine  before  men,  and  your  face  like  that  of  Moses,  appear 
with  a  divine  lustre. 

In  this  way  you  will  practically,  as  well  as  verbally,  inculcate 
the  same  life  and  temper  on  others,  which  they  observe  in  you  ; 
and  you  will  be  free  to  assist  them  in  all  their  spiritual  concerns. 
To  tliis  end  let  me  recommend  it  to  you,  to  be  ever  ready  to 
converse  with  your  people  most  freely  on  spiritual  subjects. 
Never  shun  religious  conversation,  if  the  time  and  place  properly 
admit  of  it.  If  you  should  shun  it  on  proper  occasions,  your 
people  may  become  jealous  of  you,  that  you  are  not  a  real  friend 
to  experimental  religion.  Hence  you  will  both  lose  character 
with  them,  and  lose  an  opportunity  of  doing  them  good.  Some 
christians  are  fond  of  relating  their  own  experience.  Let  me 
advise  you  to  hear  them  with  patience.  It  will  afford  you  an 
opportunity  by  judicious  remarks  to  correct  their  mistakes  and  to 
assist  their  future  progress  in  the  christian  life.  Some  may  wish 
to  know  your  experience  ;  and  I  conceive  it  is  advisable  in  proper 
time  and  place  to  indulge  their  wish.  It  may  be  useful  to  them 
and  useful  to  you.  At  the  same  time  it  will  cut  off  occasion 
from  any  who  might  otherwise  take  occasion,  to  censure  you  as 
either  destitute  of  christian  experience  or  unfriendly  to  it. 

2.  Be  wise,  prudent  and  circumspect  in  the  whole  of  your 
conduct ;  in  all  your  common  conduct,  and  in  all  your  ministerial 
work.  I  need  not  stand  to  repeat  the  particular  maxims  of  com- 
mon, of  christian,  and  of  ministerial  prudence.  They  are  nume- 
rous. Many  of  them,  I  dare  say,  have  already  occurred  to  you 
in  the  course  of  your  own  experience  and  observation.  Others 
will  continually  occur  as  you  proceed  in  hfe. 

3.  You  must  be  a  man  of  knowledge  in  the  line  of  your  pro- 
fession. You  have  heard  how  the  apostle  declared  all  the  coun- 
sel of  God.  You  have  also  heard  what  hath  been  said  to  show, 
that  all  this  counsel  may  be  preached  with  profit  to  people  in 
general.  If  you  wish  to  follow  the  apostle's  example  in  preach- 
ing, you  must  endeavor  to  inform  yourself  concerning  the  whole 
counsel  of  God ;  otherwise  you  cannot  preach  it.  I  doubt  not 
but  that  your  improvement  has  been  according  to  your  time  and 
opportunities.  But  you  are  as  yet  young,  and  must  necessarily 
fall  short  of  the  knowledge,  not  only  of  all  divine  truth,  but  of 
that  portion  of  it,  to  which  by  proper  application  you  may  easily 
attain.  Your  life  is  to  be  a  life  of  study  and  inquiry  after  the 
truth.  This  is  necessary  to  the  discharge  of  your  duty,  to  your 
usefulness,  and  to  your  reputation  as  a  minister.  A  minister  un- 
informed in  theology  and  the  subjects  which  immediately  relate 
to  it,  is  justly  despised,  and  must  expect  to  lose  all  influence. 

Vol.  II.  11 


118  ALL  BI VINE  TKUTH  PROFITABLE. 

That  you  may  attain  to  a  thorough  knowledge  of  the  system  of 
christian  truths,  search  the  scriptures  daily,  and  avail  yourself  of 
all  other  means  of  knoAvledge  within  your  reach.  Instead  of  this, 
your  proper  business,  suffer  not  worldly  cares  to  engross  your 
time  and  attention.  This  is  too  common  even  among  ministers, 
and  from  your  situation  in  a  new  settlement  you  will  be  under 
strong  temptation  to  fall  into  so  common  an  error.  Let  me  be- 
seech you  to  be  on  your  guard  against  it.  And  there  will  be  no 
necessity  of  your  falling  into  this  error,  if  your  people  discharge 
their  duty. 

Never  at  least  in  this  country  was  it  so  necessary  as  at  the 
present  time,  that  ministers  be  well  skilled  in  the  whole  system 
of  christian  theology  ;  and  that  for  these  three  reasons  ;  that  the 
country  was  never  so  knowing ;  that  there  were  never  so  many 
heresies  and  erroneous  opinions  in  the  country  ;  and  that  irreli- 
gion  and  profaneness  never  prevailed  in  it  to  so  great  a  degree. 

The  more  knowing  your  people  are,  the  more  knowledge  must 
you  have,  to  be  able  to  preach  to  their  instruction  and  edification  ; 
and  you  must  preach  to  their  instruction  and  edification,  or  you 
will  fall  into  contempt.  You  are  now  to  be  a  settled  minister, 
statedly  preaching  in  one  place.  And  to  preach  for  a  series  of 
years  in  one  place,  so  as  to  maintain  a  character,  is  known  by  ex- 
perience to  be  vastly  more  difficult  than  to  preach  with  reputation 
here  and  there,  in  various  parts  of  the  country.  It  is  also  found 
by  abundant  experience,  to  be  vastly  more  difficult  to  preserve 
the  esteem  of  a  people  after  settlement,  than  to  obtain  their  es- 
teem when  preaching  as  a  candidate  for  settlement.  The  reason 
of  both  is  manifest ;  they  require  vastly  more  knowledge  and 
solid  worth.  A  man  of  very  little  knowledge  may  put  that  know- 
ledge into  a  few  sermons,  and  so  far  his  preaching  may  be  ac- 
ceptable and  useful.  But  when  his  stock  of  knowledge  is  ex- 
hausted, if  he  go  on  to  preach,  he  must  either  preach  without 
ideas,  or  he  must  exhibit  the  same  ideas  over  again.  In  either 
case  he  must  fall  into  contempt. 

In  these  days  of  free  inquiry  questions  will  be  proposed  to 
ministers,  and  you  must  expect  that  they  will  be  proposed  to  you. 
At  the  same  time  it  will  be  expected  that  you  be  able  either  to 
answer  them,  or  at  least  to  say  more  toward  an  answer  than  any 
of  your  people.  If  once  the  idea  prevail,  that  any  of  your  peo- 
ple know  more  in  divinity,  than  their  minister,  your  character  will 
labor.  Therefore  you  must  be  superior  to  them  all ;  you  must 
be  able  to  instruct  them  all.  In  this  case  you  will  so  far  acquire 
and  maintain  an  influence. 

The  more  prevalent  heresies  or  erroneous  opinions  in  religion 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  119 

are,  the  more  knowledge  is  necessary  for  ministers,  that  they  may 
be  able  to  confute  those  errors  and  to  stop  the  mouths  of  gain- 
sayers.  And  the  more  prevalent  profaneness  and  irreligion  are, 
the  more  knowledge,  wisdom  and  prudence  does  it  require  to  op- 
pose the  torrent,  to  point  out  properly  the  ruin  and  wickedness  of 
those  vices,  and  to  recommend  and  enforce  the  contrary  virtues. 

As  there  never  was  so  great  necessity  of  knowledge  in  minis- 
ters ;  so  for  the  reasons  already  mentioned,  there  never  was  so 
great  danger  of  ministers  falling  into  contempt,  as  at  the  present 
day.  Tiie  more  knowing  the  people  are,  the  more  able  are  they 
to  discern  the  deficiency  of  their  ministers  ;  the  more  irreligious 
and  profane  they  are,  the  more  will  they  be  disposed  to  expose 
their  deficiency  ;  and  the  more  erroneous  sentiments  prevail,  the 
more  in  number  are  those  who  will  endeavor  by  exposing  the  ig- 
norance or  defects  of  ministers,  to  diminish  their  influence,  to  es- 
tai)lish  their  own,  and  to  increase  their  .party.  Therefore  minis- 
ters must  live  by  solid  merit,  as  some  men  expect  to  go  to  heaven  ; 
by  real  goodness  of  heart  and  life,  by  faithfulness  in  their  work, 
and  by  eminence  in  knowledge. 

That  you,  dear  sir,  be  really  a  good  man,  and  a  good  and  re- 
spectable minister,  is  peculiarly  necessary  and  important,  as  you 
are  going  into  the  new  settlements,  and  are  the  first  minister  of 
our  denomination  in  all  that  part  of  the  country.  You  are  to  be 
established  in  a  new  world,  and  are  to  plant  the  gospel  there ; 
take  heed  how  you  plant  it.  Sow  the  field  with  good  seed  only. 
Much  depends  on  you  with  respect  to  the  people  of  your  own 
particular  charge  ;  much  with  respect  to  neigboring  settlements ; 
and  not  only  of  the  present  but  future  generations.  If  you  sow 
the  good  seed  of  the  word,  the  good  effects  of  it  will  doubtless  ap- 
pear, not  only  among  your  own  people,  but  those  of  other  settle- 
ments in  the  vicinity  ;  and  those  effects  may  extend  themselves 
to  generations  yet  unborn.  But  if  you  sow  tares,  the  consequence 
may  be  ruin  not  only  to  many  individuals,  but  to  that  new  coun- 
try in  general,  and  that  ruin  may  reach  to  the  latest  posterity. 

By  your  situation  you  have  an  opportunity  not  only  of  building 
up  your  own  church  on  the  true  plan  of  the  gospel,  but  of  form- 
ing other  churches  all  around  you.  That  new  country,  like  a 
child  or  youth,  may  be  compared  to  a  tender  twig,  capable  of  be- 
ing bent  into  any  form.  It  is  your  part  to  form  it.  Take  heed 
how  you  form  it.  Take  heed  what  sentiments  you  preach,  what 
practice  and  what  discipline  you  introduce.  Beware  of  receding 
from  the  truth  in  any  of  these.  It  is  much  more  easy  to  begin 
right,  than  to  correct  an  error  ;  it  is  much  more  easy  to  relax, 
than  to  tighten  the  bands  once  relaxed. 


]20  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

You  will  have  great  opportunity  of  doing  good  not  only  by 
forming  churches,  but  by  introducing  ministers.  Take  care  what 
ministers  or  candidates  for  the  ministry  you  introduce.  Recom- 
mend no  man  suddenly  ;  '•  lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man."  En- 
courage neighboring  settlements  to  form  themselves  into  churches 
and  societies,  and  to  settle  ministers,  and  that  seasonably,  before 
they  shall  have  grown  lax  and  shall  have  lost  the  good  habits  in 
which  they  have  been  educated.  For  this  purpose  cultivate  an 
acquaintance  with  them ;  and  by  every  christian  and  ministerial 
kind  office  in  your  power  deserve  their  friendship  and  their  con- 
fidence. 

Very  few  ministers  in  the  United  States  are  placed  in  a  sphere 
of  so  great  usefulness,  as  that  in  which  you  are  placed  ;  few  are 
called  to  such  strenuous  exertions.  Let  this  not  discourage  but 
animate  you.  Such  a  situation  is  a  talent  for  which  you  are  ac- 
countable, and  which  you  are  obligated  faithfully  to  improve. 
"  Occupy  till  your  Lord  shall  come."  Some  of  the  good  conse- 
quences of  the  faithful  discharge  of  your  duty  have  been  already 
mentioned.  Consider  on  the  other  hand  the  consequences  of 
your  unfaithfulness  ;  the  consequence  even  in  this  life  to  yourself, 
to  your  reputation  and  to  your  own  feelings,  especially  unless 
your  conscience  shall  be  stupid  ;  consider  the  consequence  to 
your  friends  and  to  all  who  wish  well  for  Zion,  what  pain  your 
unfaithfulness  must  give  them,  and  among  others,  to  us  who  set 
you  apart  to  this  solemn  work.  But  especially  consider  the  eter- 
nal consequences  to  yourself  and  to  the  people  of  your  charge, 
and  how  you  will  be  able  to  appear  before  your  master  and  judge 
and  render  an  account  of  your  stewardship.  Let  all  these  con- 
siderations unite  to  make  you  faithful  unto  death  ;  and  then  when 
the  chief  shepherd  shall  appear,  you  shall  receive  a  crown  of  glory, 
that  fadeth  not  away. 

IL  lam  to  address  myself  to  the  representatives  of  the  church 
and  society  of  TVhitestoivn,  to  whom  I  shall  speak,  as  if  they 
were  the  whole  body  which  they  represent. 

Dear  Christian  Brethren, — We  congratulate  you  on  this 
solemn  and  joyful  occasion.  You  are  the  first  of  all  that  new 
country,  who  have  formed  yourselves  into  a  regular  church  and 
society.  In  so  doing  you  have  shown  a  becoming  attention  and 
zeal  for  religion.  It  appears  that  you  have  not  forgotten  the  good 
old  paths,  in  which  from  your  youth  you  have  been  taught  to 
walk.  Some  are  no  sooner  settled  in  the  wilderness,  than  they 
lay  aside  all  public  and  social  worship  and  all  religion.  Your 
conduct  is  a  proper  and  beautiful  contrast  to  theirs.  You  have 
seasonably  exerted  yourselves  to  establish  religion  among  you. 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PKOFITABLE.  121 

This  is  much  to  your  honor.  You  will  have  the  praise  of  it  from 
men  ;  and  no  doubt  your  conduct  is  approved  by  God  according 
to  the  sincerity  of  your  motives.  You  have  exhibited  a  proper 
example  to  others.  May  they  be  provoked  to  emulation,  and  fol- 
low your  good  example,  as  you  have  followed  the  precepts  of 
Christ. 

Brethren,  hitherto  you  have  run  well ;  let  no  man  hinder  you 
in  future.  The  race  is  not  ended  ;  it  is  but  just  begun.  What 
will  signify  all  your  attention  and  exertion  to  settle  a  minister,  if 
you  shall  not  hear  and  comply  with  the  gospel  which  he  shall 
preach  ? 

You  have  heard  the  word  of  exhortation  to  him  faithfully  to 
sow  the  good  seed  of  the  word.  Be  you  ready  to  receive  it.  Be 
you  like  the  good  ground  which  brought  forth  fruit,  some  thirty, 
some  sixty,  and  some  an  hundred  fold.  "  Hear  and  your  souls 
shall  live,  and  God  will  make  with  you  an  everlasting  covenant, 
even  the  sure  mercies  of  David." 

You  have  heard  the  exhortation  to  your  pastor  elect,  to 
give  himself  wholly  to  the  ministry.  His  compliance  with  this 
exhortation  will  depend  much  on  you.  If  you  shall  provide  for 
his  comfortable  support,  and  then  he  shall  not  be  faithful  in  his 
studies  and  ministerial  labors ;  you  will  have  discharged  your  duty 
and  delivered  your  own  souls  ;  and  you  will  thus  render  him  in- 
excusable in  his  neglect.  In  this  case  all  friends  to  religion  will 
join  in  justifying  you  and  condemning  him.  Nay,  they  would 
justify  you  in  seeking  a  dissolution  of  your  connection  with  such 
an  unfaithful  pastor. 

But  if  on  the  other  hand,  through  an  ill  applied  parsimony, 
you  shall  withhold  from  him  a  comfortable  support ;  you  will  ne- 
cessitate him  either  to  leave  you  and  go  to  others  who  shall  be 
more  disposed  to  receive  and  support  the  gospel,  or  to  neglect  his 
proper  work  as  a  minister,  in  order  to  provide  for  himself  and  his 
household.  The  consequence  will  be,  that  he  will  not  be  able 
to  preach  to  your  edification,  by  bringing  out  of  his  treasures 
things  new  and  old.  Now  what  an  ill  judged  parsimony  is  this  ! 
to  save  a  small  pittance  of  your  property,  and  starve  your  souls ! 

I  plead  not,  that  you  make  him  rich  ;  but  I  do  plead,  that  you 
support  him,  to  the  end  that  he  may  apply  himself  wholly  to  his 
ministerial  work,  for  your  benefit  and  your  honor.  It  will  be  an 
honor  to  you  to  have  a  good,  able,  instructive,  edifying  minister, 
a  man  of  distinction  for  knowledge  in  divinity  and  for  learning  in 
general ;  and  one  who  shall  be  discerned  to  be  such  wherever  he 
preaches.     Now,  give  your  pastor  a  comfortable  support ;  and 


122  ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE. 

we  hope  he  will  be  such  a  minister.  On  the  other  hand,  you  will 
be  ashamed  to  have  it  thought,  and  that  by  good  judges,  that 
your  minister  is  a  poor  preacher ;  that  his  sermons  are  dry,  bar- 
ren, uninstructive,  and  that  little  or  no  good  is  to  be  obtained 
from  them.  But  if  you  shall  withhold  his  support,  you  will  put 
yourselves  in  the  most  direct  course  to  have  such  a  minister. 

As  you  are  the  first  church  formed  and  established  in  those 
new  settlements,  much  depends  on  you  as  to  other  churches.  It 
will  be  in  your  power  to  set  an  example  of  strict  or  lax  senti- 
ments, discipline  and  practice,  and  to  introduce  customs  and 
establish  precedents,  which  may  last  for  ages.  Therefore  take 
good  heed  to  your  conduct,  both  as  individual  christians,  and  as 
a  church ;  and  "  walk  circumspectly  not  as  fools  but  as  wise." 

Beware  of  several  things  in  particular. 

1.  Beware  of  a  lax  observance  of  the  christian  sabbath.  From 
some  circumstances,  which  I  need  not  mention,  you  will  be  under 
strong  temptation  to  this.  Therefore  be  careful  both  yourselves 
to  avoid,  and  to  restrain  your  children  and  domestics  from  every 
thing  inconsistent  with  the  strict  observance  of  that  holy  day. 

2.  Beware  of  the  neglect  of  public  worship.  The  same  circum- 
stances which  will  tempt  you  to  profane  the  sabbath,  will  in  like 
manner  tempt  you  to  be  negligent  of  pubHc  worship.  Let  me 
entreat  you  to  be  on  your  guard  against  their  influence. 

3.  Beware  of  the  neglect  of  family  worship.  Resolve  with 
Joshua,  that  as  for  you  and  your  houses,  you  will  serve  the  Lord. 
And  that  you  may  induce  every  member  of  your  households  to 
serve  the  Lord  personally,  set  them  an  example  of  serving  him,  in 
maintaining  family  worship,  as  well  as  in  other  ways. 

4.  Beware  of  the  neglect  of  a  religious  education  of  your  chil- 
dren. These  hints  admit  of  much  enlargement,  but  the  time  is 
elapsed. 

Be  you,  brethren,  exemplary  in  these  and  all  other  christian 
duties.  This  will  conduce  much  to  your  own  peace,  comfort 
and  edification  ;  to  the  comfort  and  encouragement  of  your 
minister ;  to  your  own  honor,  and  to  the  glory  of  your  Creator 
and  Redeemer.  Thus  may  you  be  a  true  and  glorious  church, 
"  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an  army  with 
banners."  "From  you  may  the  word  of  the  Lord  sound  out" 
into  all  the  adjacent  parts,  "  and  in  every  place  may  your  faith  to 
God-ward  be  spread  abroad."  May  that  whole  country,  which 
so  lately  was  a  "  wilderness  and  a  solitary  place  be  glad  for  you  ; 
and  may  the  desert  rejoice  and  blossom  as  the  rose." 

"  Now  may  the  God  of  peace  that  brought  again  from  the  dead 


ALL  DIVINE  TRUTH  PROFITABLE.  123 

our  Lord  Jesus,  that  great  shepherd  of  the  sheep,  through  the 
blood  of  the  everlasting  covenant  make  you  perfect  in  every  good 
work  to  do  his  will,  working  in  you  that  which  is  well  pleasing  in 
his  sight  through  Jesus  Christ ;  to  whom  be  glory  for  ever  and 
ever,     amen." 


SERMON  VII. 


THE  MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFE'S  SISTER  CONSIDERED.* 

Leviticus  18 :  16. — Thou  shall  not  uncover  the  nakedness  of  thy  brother's 
wife  :  it  is  thy  brother's  nakedness. 

Some  of  this  respectable  auditory  may  be  surprised  to  hear 
these  words  read,  as  a  foundation  for  a  discourse,  on  the  present 
occasion.  For  the  information  and  reUef  of  such,  it  is  proper  to 
be  mentioned,  that  I  am  requested  by  the  General  Association, 
to  deliver  a  discourse  at  this  time,  on  the  following  question : 
"  Whether  it  be  lawful  for  a  man  to  marry  his  former  wife's  sis- 
ter." 

In  a  discourse  on  this  subject,  my  learned  auditors  will  expect 
nothing  of  that  kind  of  entertainment,  which  might  be  given  in  a 
discourse  on  some  other  subject.  They  will  see,  that  T  am  shut 
out  from  all  the  flowers  of  rhetoric,  all  flights  of  imagination  and 
all  addresses  to  the  passions.  Yet  our  subject  is  truly  interesting, 
because  it  is  practical,  not  only  as  any  man  may  have  occasion  to 
consider  whether  it  be  lawful  for  him  to  marry  his  wife's  sister ; 
but  as  we  may  all  be  called  to  consider  the  case  and  to  act  upon 
it  too,  with  respect  to  a  christian  brother.  If  any  of  our  chris- 
tian brethren,  the  members  of  our  churches,  shall  marry  his  wife's 
sister,  it  will  aflfect  us  immediately,  nor  shall  we  be  at  liberty  to 
act  as  indifferent  spectators.  Either  we  must  justify  the  act,  and 
continue  him  in  our  christian  fellowship ;  and  in  this  case  we 
ought  to  have  substantial  reason  for  our  conduct ;  or  we  must 
condemn  it,  must  remonstrate  against  it,  and  as  the  case  may  be, 
must  renounce  christian  fellowship  with  the  offender.  Thus 
every  man,  every  professing  christian,  every  church,  and  espe- 
cially every  minister  of  the  gospel,  is  deeply  interested  in  the 
question  which  is  now  to  come  under  consideration.  And  much 
more  so  at  the  present  day,  than  at  any  former  period  since  the 

*  Preached  in  the  chapel  of  Yale  College,  on  the  evening  after  the  Com- 
mencement, Sept.  12,  1792 ;  being  the  Anniversary  Concio  ad  Clerunu— 
Published  at  New  Haven. 


MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER.  125 

settlement  of  this  country  ;  because  at  no  former   period  have 
there  been  so  many  instances  of  such  marriages.     Nay,  even  the 
state  itself  is  concerned  in  this  question.     If  the  marriage  of  a    ,    / 
wife's  sister  be  lawful,  it  is  the  duty  of  our  legislators  to  repeal    V 
the  existing  law  against  it.     If  on  the  other  hand,  it  be  unlawful,         / 
if  it  be  forbidden   in  the   word  of  God,  and  at  the  same  time  be       / 
of  a  tendency  manifestly  hurtful  to  good  morals  and  to  good  pol- 
icy ;  no  christian  or  wise  legislator,  viewing  the  matter  in  these 
lights,  will  lift  his  hand  for  the  repeal  of  that  law. 

Thus,  though  the  subject  of  our  present  discourse  may  appear, 
at  first  view,  to  be  dry  and  uninteresting  ;  yet  in  its  consequences, 
and  in  its  influence  on  human  affairs,  it  is  of  vast  importance  and 
to  a  high  degree  interesting. 

In  this  view,  therefore,  the  preacher  hopes  for  the  candid  and 
patient  attention  of  this  learned  auditory,  while,  in  compliance 
with  the  request  of  the  General  Association,  he  shall 

I.  Mention  some  arguments  to  show,  that  it  is  not  lawful  for 
a  man  to  marry  his  former  wife's  sister. 

II.  Mention  the  objections  to  those  arguments,  and  the  an- 
swers which  may  be  made  to  them. 

I.  /  am  to  mention  some  arguments  to  show  the  unlawful- 
ness of  marrying  a  former'  wife's  sister. 

In  this  part  of  my  discourse  I  must  necessarily  be  very  brief; 
because  the  subject  is  in  its  nature  very  limited. 

1.  The  principal  argument  is  drawn  from  our  text  itself,  and 
from  that  parallel  text  in  the  twentieth  chapter  of  this  same  book 
and  the  21st  verse.  The  words  of  the  text  are,  "  Thou  shall  not 
uncover  the  nakedness  of  thy  brother's  wife :  it  is  thy  brother's 
nakedness."  The  words  of  the  21st  verse  of  the  20th  chapter 
are,  "  And  if  a  man  shall  take  his  brother's  wife,  it  is  an  unclean 
thing ;  he  hath  uncovered  his  brother's  nakedness  ;  they  shall  be 
childless."  In  these  texts  there  is  a  direct,  positive  and  repeat- 
ed prohibition  of  marriage  between  those  who  stand  in  the  same 
relation  to  each  other,  as  a  man  and  his  wife's  sister.  When  a 
man  marries  his  wife's  sister,  the  same  man  marries  two  sisters. 
And  when  a  man  marries  his  brother's  widow,  the  same  woman 
marries  two  brothers.  And  as  the  relation  between  a  man  and 
his  wife's  sister  is  the  same  as  between  a  woman  and  her  hus- 
band's brother  ;  it  seems  naturally  to  follow,  that  since  it  is  un- 
lawful for  a  man  to  marry  his  brother's  wife,  it  is  also  unlawful 
for  a  woman  to  marry  her  sister's  husband  ;  or  which  is  the  same 
thing,  for  a  man  to  marry  his  wife's  sister.  And  it  seems  diffi- 
cult to  conceive  a  reason,  why  it  is  not  as  unlawful  for  a  man  to 
marry  two  sisters,  as  it  is  for  a  woman  to  marry  two  brothers. 


126  MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER. 

This  is  the  allowed  manner  of  arguing  with  respect  to  all  the 
other  relations  mentioned  in  these  chapters.  When  marriage  is 
forbidden  between  any  two  relatives,  we  argue  that  the  prohibi- 
tion extends  to  all  those  who  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  each 
other.  For  instance,  a  man  is  forbidden  to  marry  his  son's  daugh- 
ter or  his  daughter's  daughter.  Therefore  we  infer,  that  a  wo- 
man also  is  forbidden  to  marry  her  son's  son,  or  her  daughter's 
son,  though  it  be  not  expressly  mentioned  ;  and  so  in  all  other 
instances. 

2.  Beside  this  argument  from  scripture,  it  is  said,  that  reason 
coincides  in  this  case  with  revelation.  Some  of  the  principal 
reasons,  why  the  intermarriage  of  brothers  and  sisters,  parents 
and  children  is  forbidden,  are,  first,  that  if  such  marriages  were 
indulged,  friendly  society  and  the  kind  offices,  which  are  the  nat- 
ural consequence  of  affinity,  would  be  more  contracted,  and  fam- 
ilies of  opulence  and  honor  would  clan  together  and  keep  them- 
selves much  more  separate  from  the  rest  of  the  community. 
Such  clans  would  tend  to  excite  jealousy  in  each  other  and  in 
the  citizens  in  general,  and  thus  a  foundation  would  be  laid  for 
civil  alienations,  discord,  tumults  and  bloodshed.  Secondly,  That 
between  near  relations  there  are  inconceivably  more  opportunities 
to  carry  on  criminal  conversation,  than  between  other  persons. 
For  these  two  reasons,  it  is  supposed,  that  it  pleased  God  utterly 
to  forbid  all  connections  by  marriage  or  by  carnal  intercourse, 
between  near  relations.  But  these  reasons  are  as  forcible  against 
marrying  a  wife's  sister  as  against  most  of  the  other  marriages  al- 
lowed on  all  hands  to  be  forbidden  in  scripture. 

I  am  not  insensible,  that  there  are  several  objections  urged 
against  this  doctrine  and  particularly  against  the  construction, 
which  has  been  now  given  of  those  texts  in  the  18th  and  20th 
chapters  of  Leviticus  ;  and  those  objections  require  a  particular 
and  candid  attention.     Therefore  we  proceed  now 

II.  To  consider  those  objections  and  the  answers,  which  have 
been  or  may  be  made  to  them. 

1.  It  is  objected,  that  the  texts  in  the  18th  and  20th  chapters 
of  Leviticus  say  nothing  concerning  a  wife's  sister,  and  that  we 
have  no  right  to  extend  their  meaning  beyond  what  they  express- 
ly mention  ;  that  Moses  has  expressly  forbidden  all  that  he  meant 
to  forbid,  and  has  not  left  it  to  us  to  argue  out  from  a  parallelism 
of  cases  or  similarity  of  relations,  what  he  meant  to  forbid  and 
what  not ;  that  since  Moses  has  forbidden  to  marry  a  brother's 
wife,  that  is  doubtless  unlawful  ;  but  since  he  has  not  expressly 
forbidden  to  marry  a  wife's  sister,  that  remains  as  lawful  as  any 
other  marriage  ;  and  that  all  penal  laws  which  concern  life,  limb 


MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIPe's  SISTER.  127 

or  the  safety  of  the  soul  are  to  be  taken  according  to  the  express 
letter  of  those  laws.  This  is  the  objection  ;  and  the  answer  is, 
that  if  it  prove  anything,  it  proves  too  much,  and  so  proves  no- 
thing. The  principle  on  which  the  objection  is  built,  is  this,  that 
whatever  marriage  is  not  expressly  forbidden  by  Moses,  he  leaves 
open  and  free  to  all,  and  virtually  declares  it  to  be  lawful,  not- 
withstanding anything  which  he  has  said  against  the  marriage  of 
those  who  stand  in  the  same  relation.  But  this  principle  implies 
consequences,  which  none  of  those  w^ho  urge  the  objection  will 
avow.  It  implies,  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  woman  to  marry  her 
grandson,  though  it  is  expressly  forbidden  that  a  man  marry  his 
grand  daughter  ;  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  man  to  marry  his  mother's 
brother's  wife,  though  he  may  not  marry  his  father's  brother's 
wife  ;  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  woman  to  marry  her  father's  sister's 
or  mother's  sister's  husband,  though  it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man  to 
marry  his  father's  brother's  wife  ;  that  it  is  lawful  for  a  woman 
to  marry  her  husband's  grandson,  though  not  for  a  man  to  marry 
his  wife's  grand  daughter. 

But  since  no  man  will  allow,  that  the  several  marriages  now 
mentioned  are  lawful,  though  not  expressly  forbidden  by  Moses ; 
and  since  all  allow,  that  they  are  virtually  forbidden,  inasmuch 
as  marriage  between  those  who  stand  in  the  same  relation  is  ex- 
pressly forbidden  ;  therefore  to  be  consistent,  we  must  allow, 
that  the  marriage  of  a  wife's  sister  is  unlawful  and  is  virtually 
forbidden,  in  that  we  are  expressly  forbidden  to  marry  a  bro- 
ther's wife. 

And  the  rule  that  all  penal  laws  are  to  be  construed  literally 
fails  in  these  and  a  thousand  other  instances.  I  shall  mention 
one,  the  law  against  man-stealing  in  Ex.  21:  16,  "  He  that  steal- 
eth  a  man  and  selleth  him,  shall  surely  be  put  to  death."  No 
one  will  say,  that  this,  because  it  is  a  penal  law,  is  to  be  taken 
literally  to  respect  the  stealing  of  a  inan  only,  and  not  to  include 
the  stealing  of  a  woman  or  a  child  ;  that  the  stealing  and  selling 
of  a  man  shall  be  punished  with  death,  but  the  stealing  and  sell- 
ing of  a  woman  or  a  child  shall  expose  to  no  punishment. 

2,  Another  objection  to  what  has  been  advanced  on  those 
texts  of  scripture,  is,  that  they  prohibit  a  certain  connection  with 
a  brother's  ivife,  but  not  the  marriage  of  a  brother's  widow ;  that 
they  mean  to  prevent  adultery  with  a  brother's  wife  ;  that  this  is 
the  sense  and  drift  of  the  chapters  in  general ;  that  God  not  only 
forbade  adultery  in  the  seventh  commandment,  but  in  these  chap- 
ters meant  to  give  pointed  cautions  against  adultery  between  those 
who  are  nearly  related  ;  that  this  must  be  the  meaning  of  the 
16th  verse  of  the  18th  chapter,  is  argued  from  this,  that  the  naked- 


128 

ness  of  thy  brother's  wife  is  said  to  be  thy  brother's  nakedness, 
which  it  is  said  imphes,  that  he  was  yet  ahve ;  for  if  he  were 
dead,  it  could  not  be  said  to  be  his  nakedness. 

To  this  it  is  answered,  If  these  chapters  in  Leviticus  prohibit 
adultery  and  fornication  only,  there  is  in  all  the  scriptures  no  pro- 
hibition of  incestuous  marriages  ;  nor  are  any  marriages  whatever 
incestuous  in  the  estimate  of  scripture.  For  in  no  texts  are  they 
more  plainly  forbidden  than  in  these  chapters  ;  and  if  these  chap- 
ters be  construed  to  mean  adultery  and  fornication  only,  the  like 
construction  may,  with  at  least  as  great  plausibility,  be  put  on 
every  text  relating  to  the  subject  in  the  whole  bible  ;  nor,  upon 
the  ground  of  this  objection,  shall  we  be  able  to  prove  from  scrip- 
ture, that  it  is  unlawful  for  a  man  to  marry  his  own  sister,  his 
own  daughter  or  his  own  mother. 

As  to  the  plea  that  these  texts  mention  a  brother's  wife,  but 
not  a  brother's  widow ;  and  that  therefore  they  do  not  prohibit 
the  marriage  of  a  brother's  widow ;  on  the  ground  of  this  plea, 
we  have  in  these  chapters  and  in  all  the  scripture,  no  prohibition 
of  marrying  our  father's  widows,  our  uncle's  widows,  etc.  The 
only  prohibition  is  not  to  marry  a  father's  wife,  and  an  uncle's 
wife,  and  no  mention  is  made,  in  this  case,  of  a  father's  or  un- 
cle's widow. 

Besides ;  in  the  language  of  the  Old  Testament,  a  widow  is 
very  commonly  called  a  wife.  Thus  Judah  after  the  death  of 
his  son  Er,  said  to  his  second  son  Onan,  "  go  in  unto  thy  bro- 
ther's ivife,  and  marry  her,  and  raise  up  seed  to  thy  brother," 
Gen.  38:  8.  "  If  brethren  dwell  together  and  one  of  them  die  and 
have  no  child,  the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not  marry  without,  unto 
a  stranger,"  Deut.  25:  5.  "  Thou  must  buy  it  also  of  Ruth,  the 
Moabitess,  the  wife  of  the  dead,^'  Ruth  4:  5.  "  Moreover  Ruth, 
the  Moabitess,  the  wife  of  Mahlon,  have  I  purchased  to  be  my 
wife,"  verse  10. 

As  to  the  argument  in  favor  of  the  construction  which  I  now 
oppose,  drawn  from  this,  that  the  nakedness  of  thy  brother's  wife 
is  said  to  be  thy  brother's  nakedness  ;  there  is  nothing  peculiar  in 
the  expression  as  used  with  reference  to  a  brother's  wife.  It  is 
applied  to  several  of  the  other  relations  mentioned  in  these  chap- 
ters ;  as  to  thy  father's  wife,  and  her  nakedness  is  said  to  be  thy 
father's  nakedness.  Yet  it  is  not  hence  argued  to  be  lawful  to 
marry  a  father's  widow. 

To  enforce  the  objection  now  under  consideration,  it  is  further 
said,  that  to  uncover  nakedness  is  not  the  usual  phrase  to  signify 
marriage  or  the  free  intercourse  between  married  persons.  How- 
ever, the  phrase  seems  to  be  of  very  general  import,  comprehend- 


MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER.  129 

ing  familiar  commerce  in  general  between  those  of  opposite  sexes, 
whether  married  or  not.  Therefore  in  the  20th  chapter,  which 
is  manifestly  a  repetition  of  this,  the  phrase  generally  used  instead 
of  uncovering  nakedness,  is  lying  with.  Thus  it  is  said,  "  The 
man  that  lieth  ivith  his  father's  wife,  hath  uncovered  his  father's 
nakedness.''  "If  a  man  lie  with  his  daughter  in  law," — "If  a 
man  lie  with  his  uncle's  wife,"  etc.  Therefore  to  uncover  the 
nakedness  of  a  person  and  to  lie  with  a  person  of  the  opposite 
sex,  are  manifestly,  in  the  language  of  scripture,  expressions  of 
the  same  meaning.  And  to  lie  with,  is  in  scripture  as  familiarly 
applied  to  the  intercourse  between  married  persons,  as  between 
others.  See  2  Sam.  11:  11,  "  And  Uriah  said  unto  David,  The 
ark  and  Israel  and  Judah  abide  in  tents,  and  my  lord  Joab  and 
the  servants  of  my  lord  are  encamped  in  the  open  fields  ;  shall  I 
then  go  into  mine  house,  to  eat  and  to  drink  and  to  lie  with  my 
ivife  V 

It  is  further  to  be  observed,  that  in  the  20th  chapter  what  re- 
lates to  a  brother's  wife  is  still  differently  expressed.  See  the 
21st  verse,  "  If  a  man  shall  take  his  brother's  wife,  it  is  an  un- 
clean thing."  The  word  take  here  used  is  cbmmonly  used  to  ex- 
press the  receiving  of  a  woman  in  marriage  ;  as  in  the  following 
passages  ;  Gen.  34:  9,  "  And  make  ye  marriages  with  us,  and  give 
your  daughters  unto  us,  and  take  our  daughters  unto  you  ;"  and 
verse  16,  "  Then  will  we  give  our  daughters  unto  you,  and  we 
will  take  your  daughters  to  us,  and  we  will  dwell  with  you,  and 
we  will  become  one  people."  Deut.  25:  5,  "  If  brethren  dwell 
together,  and  one  of  them  die  and  have  no  child — her  husband's 
brother  shall  go  in  unto  her,  and  take  her  to  him  to  wife."  The 
word  in  the  original  in  all  these  places  is  the  same  which  is  used 
in  the  21st  verse  of  the  20th  chapter  of  Leviticus.  And  by  these 
authorities  it  appears,  that  not  only  to  take  to  wife  signifies  mar- 
riage, but  absolutely  to  take  a  woman  signifies  the  same. 

Therefore  to  take  a  brother's  wife  is  the  proper  expression  to 
denote  the  contract  of  marriage  with  her.  But  we  are  as  express- 
ly forbidden  to  take  a  brother's  wife,  as  we  are  to  uncover  her 
nakedness. 

3.  A  further  objection  is,  that  this  law  in  Leviticus  is  merely 
ceremonial  or  peculiar  to  the  Israelitish  polity,  and  has  no  more 
respect  to  us,  than  the  laws  forbidding  the  making  of  garments 
of  diverse  kinds  of  materials,  and  the  sowing  of  a  field  with  di- 
verse kinds  of  seed. 

Ans.  1 .  The  prohibition  of  marrying  a  brother's  wife  no  more 
appears  to  be  merely  ceremonial,  than  any  of  the  other  prohibi- 
tions in  these  chapters,  and  no  reason  can  be  given,  why  it  should 

Vol.  IL  12 


130  MARRIAGE   OF   A  WIFe's   SISTER. 

be  understood  to  be  merely  ceremonial,  which  will  not  hold  good 
with  respect  to  many  of  the  others.  Yet  it  will  not  be  pretend- 
ed that  either  all  the  other  prohibitions  in  these  chapters,  or  even 
those  which  respect  persons  between  whom  there  is  no  relation 
by  blood,  are  merely  ceremonial,  and  of  no  obligation  upon  us. 
Thus  this  objection  like  most  of  the  rest,  if  it  proves  anything, 
proves  too  much,  and  so  proves  nothing. 

Ans.  2.  After  the  enumeration  of  the  various  prohibited  mar- 
riages, it  is  added,  in  the  24th  and  25th  verses  of  the  18th  chap- 
ter, "  Defile  not  you  yourselves  in  any  of  these  things  ;  for  in  all 
these  the  nations  are  defiled  which  I  cast  out  before  you  ;  and 
the  land  is  defiled  ;  therefore  I  do  visit  the  iniquity  upon  it,  and 
the  land  itself  vomiteth  out  her  inhabitants."  And  verse  27th, 
"  For  all  these  abominations  have  the  men  of  the  land  done, 
which  were  before  you,  and  the  land  is  defiled."  The  like  words 
occur  in  the  23d  verse  of  the  20th  chapter,  "  And  ye  shall  not 
walk  in  the  manners  of  the  nation,  which  I  cast  out  before  you ; 
for  they  committed  all  these  things,  and  therefore  I  abhorred 
them."  By  all  these  incestuous  marriages  tlie  Canaanites  were 
defiled.  But  they  w'ere  never  under  the  ceremonial  law.  There- 
fore all  these  marriages  were  violations  of  the  moral  law  ;  other- 
wise the  Canaanites  would  not  have  been  defiled  by  them.  This 
I  conceive  determines  these  marriages  to  be  not  mere  ceremonial 
sins. 

That  all  the  prohibitions  in  these  chapters  do  not  respect  men 
in  general,  and  that  some  of  them  are  ceremonial,  is  argued  from 
the  19th  verse  of  the  18th  chapter,  "  Also  thou  shalt  not  approach 
unto  a  woman,  to  uncover  her  nakedness,  as  long  as  she  is  apart 
for  her  uncleanness."  But  it  is  by  no  means  agreed,  that  this 
prohibition  is  merely  ceremonial.  It  is  the  general  opinion  of 
commentators,  that  it  respects  men  in  general,  as  may  be  seen  in 
Pool's  Synopsis,  where  the  reasons  also  for  their  opinion  may  be 
seen.  And  it  is  said,  that  even  the  aborigines  of  this  country 
cautiously  abstain  from  women  during  their  periodical  indispo- 
sition. 

But  supposing  this  prohibition  of  the  19th  verse  just  quoted 
merely  ceremonial,  it  will  not  follow,  that  also  the  prohibition  of 
the  marriage  in  question  is  ceremonial.  A  variety  of  marriages 
of  those  who  are  akin  by  both  consanguinity  and  affinity,  are 
prohibited  in  these  chapters.  One  of  these  prohibitions  is  said  to 
be  merely  ceremonial  ;  and  the  reason  given  for  this  conclusion 
is,  that  a  certain  other  transaction,  not  a  marriage,  nor  peculiar 
to  those  who  are  akin,  is  forbidden  in  the  same  chapter ;  and  this 
last  prohibition  is  now  supposed  to  be  ceremonial.    But  who  does 


MARRIAGE   OF   A  WIFE  S   SISTER.  131 

not  see,  that  this  reasoning  is  very  inconclusive  ?  The  reasoning 
is  this  :  The  prohibition  of  intercourse,  at  certain  times,  between 
persons  of  the  different  sexes,  whether  related  or  not,  is  a  cere- 
monial prohibition  ;  therefore  the  prohibition  of  the  marriage  of 
a  brother's  wife  is  a  ceremonial  prohibition. 

Indeed  if  the  prohibition  of  this  intercourse  be  a  ceremonial 
prohibition,  it  will  follow,  that  the  universal  terms,  all  these  things, 
and  all  these  abominations,  used  in  the  24th  and  27th  verses  of 
the  18th  chapter,  do  not  mean  an  absolute  and  unlimited  univer- 
sality. But  if  this  were  granted,  how  would  it  appear,  that  they 
are  to  be  so  limited,  as  to  exclude  the  marriage  of  a  brother's 
wife  ?  Surely  some  substantial  reason  should  be  given  for  this 
particular  limitation,  allowing  at  the  same  time,  that  the  prohibi- 
tions of  marriages  in  general  in  this  chapter  are  not  ceremonial. 

4.  There  is  no  relation  by  blood  between  a  man  and  his  wife's 
sister  ;  therefore  it  is  said  to  be  lawful  for  him  to  marry  her. 
Answer.  This  objection  takes  it  for  granted,  that  it  is  lawful  for 
any  person  to  marry  any  other  person  with  whom  he  has  no  re- 
lation by  blood.  If  so,  he  may  marry  his  brother's  wife  his  father's 
wife,  his  uncle's  wife,  his  wife's  daughter,  his  son's  wife,  etc.  all 
which  marriages  are  expressly  forbidden  in  these  chapters  in  Le- 
viticus. On  the  other  hand,  there  is  a  real  relation  by  blood  be- 
tween cousin  germans  ;  yet  marriage  between  them  is  not  forbid- 
den. On  the  whole  therefore,  this  objection  supposes  that  the 
lawfulness  or  unlawfulness  of  particular  marriages  is  not  to  be 
determined  by  the  scriptures.  The  truth  is,  that  without  the 
scriptures  we  should  know  but  very  little  concerning  this  subject, 
or  with  whom  we  might  lawfully,  and  with  whom  we  might  not 
lawfully  marry.  We  must  therefore  be  guided  in  this,  as  well 
as  in  many  other  things,  by  the  scriptures ;  and  they  forbid  mar- 
riage not  only  between  many  who  are  related  by  blood ;  but  be- 
tween many  who  are  not  thus  related,  and  between  a  man  and 
his  brother's  wife,  or  his  wife's  sister,  as  well  as  others.  And  in 
consequence  of  the  divine  prohibition,  marriages  of  the  latter  de- 
scription are  as  really  and  totally  unlawful  as  those  of  the  former. 

5.  Another  objection  is,  that  to  marry  a  brother's  wife,  and 
consequently  a  wife's  sister,  is  not  unlawful  per  se,  or  unlawful 
in  its  own  nature ;  nor  is  there  any  immorality  in  it.  For  what 
is  immoral  and  unlawful  per  se,  can  never  be  licensed  even  by 
God  himself.  God  himself  cannot  overturn  the  foundations  of 
morality  and  moral  obligation.  This  would  be  for  him  to  deny 
himself.  But  he  has  licensed,  and  in  a  certain  case  has  expressly 
commanded  the  marrying  of  a  brother's  wife,  as  Deut.  25:  5,  "  If 
brethren  dwell  together,  and  one  of  them  die  and  have  no  child ; 


132  MARRIAGE   OF   A  WIFe's   SISTER. 

the  wife  of  the  dead  shall  not  marry  without  unto  a  stranger :  her 
husband's  brother  shall  go  in  unto  her  and  take  her  to  him  to 
wife."  Therefore  the  prohibitions  of  marrying  a  brother's  wife 
in  Lev.  xviii.  and  xx,  must  be  merely  ceremonial  and  do  not  ex- 
tend to  us. 

In  answer  to  this  it  may  be  observed,  that  what  is  meant  by 
immoral  and  unlawful  in  its  own  nature,  or  unlawful  per  se, 
needs  to  be  explained.  If  by  those  phrases  be  meant  an  action 
which  is  in  such  a  sense  immoral  and  unlawful,  that  God  cannot 
consistently  with  his  holy  perfections  license  it ;  it  is  granted  that 
for  a  man  to  marry  his  wife's  sister  is  not  immoral  or  unlawful 
per  se.  But  if  by  those  expressions  be  meant  an  action,  which 
without  a  divine  license,  and  in  the  common  course  of  providence, 
would  be  unlawful ;  then  marriage  with  a  wife's  sister  is  immoral 
and  unlawful  per  se  ;  yet  it  may  become  lawful  by  a  divine  li- 
cense or  command. 

I  beg  leave  to  ask  the  objector.  Is  it  immoral  for  brothers  and 
sisters  to  intermarry  ?  Is  it  immoral  for  a  holy  prophet  of  God 
to  marry  a  common  prostitute  ?  Is  it  immoral  to  offer  human 
sacrifice  ?  Is  it  immoral  for  one  nation,  which  has  received  and 
is  threatened  with  no  injury  from  another,  to  make  war  on  that 
other,  to  subdue,  kill,  enslave  or  exterminate  the  whole,  men, 
women  and  children,  and  to  possess  their  country  ?  If  these  be 
immoral,  as  they  doubtless  are  without  a  divine  license,  and  in  the 
common  course  of  providence ;  then  God  may  license  what  be- 
fore such  license  was  immoral,  and  may  by  license  and  command 
render  that  lawful  and  duty,  which  otherwise  would  have  been 
unlawful,  immoral  and  wicked. 

God  commanded  the  brothers  and  sisters  of  Adam's  family  to 
intermarry  ;  yet  all  grant,  that  it  is  unlawful  for  brothers  and  sisters 
to  intermarry  in  succeeding  ages,  without  a  divine  command  and 
under  the  ordinary  dispensations  of  divine  providence.  And  if  such 
marriage  may  be  rendered  lawful  by  some  extraordinary  dispen- 
sation of  providence,  doubtless  it  may  be  rendered  equally  lawful 
by  the  express  command  of  God.  God  commanded  the  prophet 
Hosea  to  marry  a  common  prostitute ;  Hos.  1:  2,  3,  "  The  Lord 
said  to  Hosea,  Go  take  thee  a  wife  of  whoredoms — So  he  went 
and  took  Gomer  the  daughter  of  Diblaim,  which  conceived  and 
bare  him  a  son."  Though  human  sacrifices  in  general,  and  par- 
ticularly the  offering  of  our  own  children  in  sacrifice,  is  in  ordinary 
cases  grossly  immoral ;  yet  God  licensed  it,  yea,  by  express  com- 
mand enjoined  it  upon  Abraham,  and  thus  made  it  not  only  law- 
ful, but  his  indispensable  duty,  to  offer  up  in  sacrifice  his  only 
son  Isaac. 


MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER.  133 

If  it  be  said  in  this  case,  that  though  God  gave  this  command, 
yet  he  afterwards  reversed  it  by  the  voice  of  the  angel,  so  that 
Isaac  was  not  really  sacrificed  ;  I  answer,  this  alters  not  the  case 
as  to  the  present  argument.  For  God  can  no  more  command 
actions,  which  were  neither  lawful  before,  nor  are  capable  of 
being  rendered  lawful  by  such  command,  than  he  can  continue 
to  command  them.  For  instance,  he  can  no  more  command  a 
man  maliciously  to  blaspheme  the  holy  name  of  God,  than  he  can 
continue  to  command  it.  He  can  no  more  command  a  man  to 
indulge  malevolence  toward  his  neighbor,  than  he  can  continue 
to  command  it. 

God  commanded  the  Israelites  to  extirpate  the  Canaanites,  and 
utterly  destroy  them ;  as  Deut.  7:  2,  "  And  when  the  Lord  thy 
God  shall  deliver  them  before  thee  ;  thou  shalt  smite  them,  and 
utterly  destroy  them,  thou  shalt  make  no  covenant  with  them,  nor 
show  mercy  unto  them."  Chap.  20;  16,  "  Of  the  cities  of  these 
people  which  the  Lord  thy  God  doth  give  thee  for  an  inheritance, 
thou  shalt  save  nothing  alive  that  breatheth  ;  but  thou  shalt  utterly 
destroy  them."  Now  it  would  doubtless  be  a  very  great  immorali- 
ty, if  any  nation  without  a  divine  command  and  warrant,  should 
treat  in  this  manner  any  other  nation.  And  it  would  have  been 
the  same  immorality  in  the  Israelites  themselves,  if  they  had  not 
had  a  divine  warrant  for  their  proceeding.  But  with  this  divine 
warrant  and  command,  it  not  only  became  lawful  for  them,  but 
became  their  indispensable  duty.  I  might  further  adduce  the  in- 
stance of  the  destruction  of  the  Amalekites  by  Saul,  which  you 
well  remember. 

By  all  these  instances  it  appears,  that  what  would  otherwise 
be  entirely  unlawful,  yet  by  a  divine  command  may  become  both 
lawful  and  an  absolute  duty.  So  that  though  the  marriage  of  a 
brother's  wife  be  in  itself  as  unlawful  and  immoral,  as  the  mar- 
riage of  an  own  sister,  as  the  offering  of  human  sacrifices,  or  as 
the  total  destruction  of  one  nation  by  another,  when  the  former 
hath  given  no  provocation  to  the  latter  ;  yet  God  may  license  it, 
command  it,  and  thus  render  it  lawful  and  duty.  Thus  the  ob- 
jection against  the  immorality  of  marrying  a  brother's  wife  and  a 
wife's  sister  falls  to  the  ground. 

The  truth  is,  that  God  may  license  and  command  any  action, 
which  does  not  imply  a  wicked  heart,  and  is  not  inconsistent  with 
the  good  of  the  intelligent  system.  He  who  is  the  author  of 
men's  lives  and  to  whom  they  have  forfeited  them,  has  a  right 
to  take  them  away  at  any  time,  and  by  any  causes  or  means,  as 
he  shall  see  fit.  He  has  a  right  to  make  any  man  the  executioner 
of  any  other  man,  and  may  command  him  to  put  that  other  to 

12* 


134  MARRIAGE  OF   A  WIFe's  SISTER. 

death.  He  hath  a  right  to  take  any  man's  wife  from  him  and 
give  her  to  his  brother,  while  her  former  husband  is  yet  Uving  ; 
and  certainly  he  has  a  right  to  do  the  same  after  he  is  dead.  And 
the  taking  of  her  to  wife  by  the  second  brother  might  be  so  far 
from  implying  a  wicked  heart  or  any  wickedness  at  all,  that  it 
might  be  as  sincere  an  act  of  virtue  and  piety,  as  the  act  of  Abra- 
ham in  ofTering  up  Isaac. 

This  whole  objection  depends  on  a  false  principle,  which  is 
this,  that  moral  duty  and  obligation  are  always  the  same  and  ab- 
solutely invariable.  But  this  principle  is  manifestly  false,  unless  it 
be  properly  explained  and  limited.  There  are  indeed  some  hu- 
man actions,  which  are  invariably  obligatory  and  cannot  become 
sinful.  Such  as  sincere  and  supreme  love  to  God,  sincere  be- 
nevolence to  men.  and  all  those  external  and  internal  actions, 
which  necessarily  imply  these.  On  the  other  hand,  there  are 
some  human  actions  which  are  invariably  and  necessarily  sinful, 
and  cannot  become  lawful  in  any  case  whatever,  and  which  God 
himself  cannot  consistently  with  his  own  perfections  hcense  ; 
such  as  enmity  against  God,  malice  toward  men,  supreme  self- 
love,  and  all  those  actions  external  and  internal  which  necessa- 
rily involve  these. 

But  the  marrying  of  a  brother's  wife,  when  commanded  by 
God,  no  more  necessarily  involves  enmity  against  God,  malice 
toward  men,  or  supreme  self-love,  than  they  were  involved  in 
Abraham's  offering  up  Isaac. 

With  regard  to  the  license  and  command  of  God  to  marry  a 
brother's  wife,  in  Deut.  25;  5,  it  is  to  be  observed  that  it  by  no 
means  repeals  the  general  law  against  marrying  a  brother's  wife 
delivered  in  Lev.  xviii.  and  xx.  It  is  a  permission  given  in  a  par- 
ticular case  only,  viz.  when  a  man  died  childless.  It  is  therefore 
a  mere  exception  to  the  general  law,  and  not  a  repeal  of  it.  But 
an  exception  to  a  general  rule  always  confirms  the  rule  in  all 
cases,  beside  that  which  is  excepted.  For  instance,  the  exception 
made  to  the  general  law  in  Num.  27:  8,  "  And  tiiou  shalt  speak 
unto  the  children  of  Israel  saying.  If  a  man  die,  and  have  no  son, 
then  ye  shall  cause  his  inheritance  to  pass  unto  his  daughter." 
This  by  no  means  implies  that  the  inheritance  was  to  pass  to  the 
daughter  in  general,  or  in  any  other  case,  than  that  which  is  here 
specified  ;  but  manifestly  implies,  that  in  all  other  cases,  it  was 
to  pass  to  the  son  or  sons.  Just  so  as  to  the  law  under  consider- 
ation. As  the  general  law  is,  that  a  man  shall  not  marry  his 
brother's  wife,  the  exception  that  if  a  man  should  die  childless, 
his  brother  under  that  dispensation  and  in  that  nation,  in  which  it 
was  necessary  to  keep  every  family  as  far  as  might  be  from  be- 


MARRIAGE  OF   A  WIFe's  SISTER.  135 

coming  extinct,  should  take  his  brother's  wife  and  raise  up  seed 
to  his  brother,  no  more  repeals  the  general  law,  than  the  excep- 
tion with  regard  to  the  descent  of  estates  before  mentioned,  re- 
peals the  general  law  on  that  head. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  needless  to  add  that  as  the  necessity  of 
keeping  up  every  family  distinct,  which  was  the  reason  of  the 
exception  to  the  law  against  marrying  a  brother's  wife,  does  not 
now  exist  among  us  Gentiles ;  so  the  exception  itself  does  no 
longer  exist,  and  the  general  law  is  left  to  operate  in  its  utmost 
extent. 

6.  Another  objection  is,  that  there  is  in  the  18th  verse  of  the 
18th  chapter,  an  implicit  permission  to  marry  a  wife's  sister. 
"  Neither  shalt  thou  take  a  wife  to  her  sister,  to  vex  her,  to  un- 
cover her  nakedness,  besides  the  other  in  her  life  time."  Though 
this  forbids  to  marry  a  wife's  sister  during  the  life  of  the  wife  ; 
yet  it  implicitly  gives  a  license  for  such  marriage  after  her  death. 

The  first  answer  to  this  is,  that  this  text  cannot  mean  to  pro- 
hibit the  marryingof  a  wife's  sister,  during  the  life  of  the  wife,  and 
implicitly  to  permit  such  a  marriage  after  the  death  of  the  wife ; 
because  this  would  be  an  implicit  permission  to  marry  any  other 
woman  during  the  life  of  the  first  wife.  It  is  plain,  that  a  prohi- 
bition to  marry  a  wife's  sister  during  the  life  of  the  first  wife,  is 
an  implicit  permission  to  marry  any  other  woman  during  the  life 
of  the  first  wife,  which  is  a  permission  and  licensing  of  polygamy. 
Therefore,  if  this  be  the  sense  of  the  text  in  question,  polygamy 
was  lawful  under  the  old  testament.  Yet  it  is  plain  by  the 
prophet  Malachi,  by  our  Lord,  and  by  the  apostle  Paul,  that  po- 
lygamy was  unlawful  under  the  old  testament.  The  passage  in 
Malachi  to  which  I  refer,  is  chap.  2:  13 — 16,  "  He  regardeth  not 
the  offering  any  more,  or  receiveth  it  with  good  will  at  your  hand. 
Yet  ye  say,  wherefore  ?  Because  the  Lord  hath  been  witness  be- 
tween thee  and  the  wife  of  thy  youth,  against  whom  thou  hast 
dealt  treacherously.  Yet  she  is  thy  companion,  and  the  wife  of 
thy  covenant.  And  did  he  not  make  one  ?  Yet  had  he  the  resi- 
due of  the  spirit.  And  wherefore  one  ?  That  he  might  seek  a 
godly  seed.  Therefore  take  heed  to  your  spirit,  and  let  none 
deal  treacherously  against  the  wife  of  his  youth."  In  this  passage 
all  are  forbidden  to  deal  treacherously  with  the  wives  of  their 
youth.  And  what  was  meant  by  dealing  treacherously  with  them, 
is  explained  in  these  words,  "  And  did  he  not  make  onel  i.  e. 
one  woman  for  one  man.  ''  Yet  he  had  the  residue  of  the  spirit," 
and  was  abundantly  able  to  have  created  more  women  for  one 
man,  if  it  had  been  lawful  and  best  for  him  to  have  more.  And 
"wherefore"  did  he  make  but  "one"  woman?  "That  he 
might  seek  a  godly  seed ;"  i.  e.  because  monogamy,  or  the  hav- 


136  MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER. 

ing-  but  one  wife,  is  subservient  to  godliness,  and  polygamy  is 
hurtful  to  it.  Thus  does  this  prophet  clearly  decide  against  the 
lawfulness  of  polygamy  under  the  old  testament. 

The  testimony  of  our  Savior  on  this  head  is  not  less  express 
and  pertinent ;  it  is  in  Matt.  19:  4 — 7,  "  Have  you  not  read,  that 
he  which  made  them  at  the  beginning,  made  them  male  and  fe- 
male ?  And  said,  for  this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  father  and 
mother,  and  shall  cleave  to  his  wife  ;  and  they  twain  shall  be  one 
flesh.  Wherefore  they  are  no  more  twain,  but  one  flesh." 
They  twain,  not  they  three  or  four,  were  to  be  one  flesh  ;  and  a 
man  was  to  leave  father  and  mother  and  cleave  to  his  wife,  not  to 
his  wives.  And  this  was  the  design  and  institution  of  God yrom 
the  beginning,  under  the  old  testament  as  well  as  the  new. 

The  apostle  Paul  also  quotes  the  same  words  from  Gen.  2:  24, 
and  construes  them  in  the  same  sense,  as  you  may  see  in  Eph.  5: 
31,  "For  this  cause  shall  a  man  leave  his  father  and  mother,  and 
shall  be  joined  to  his  wife,  and  they  two  shall  be  one  flesh." 

Thus  clearly  it  appears,  that  polygamy  was  unlawful  even  un- 
der the  old  testament,  and  consequently  that  there  is  no  license 
for  it  given  in  Lev.  18:  18,  as  there  is,  if  that  text  be  understood 
to  refer  to  a  natural  sister. 

The  second  answer  to  this  objection  is,  that  from  a  careful  at- 
tention to  the  original  it  does  not  appear,  that  by  the  word  trans- 
lated sister  in  this  verse,  is  meant  natural  sister,  but  some  reasons 
to  the  contrary  may  be  given.  The  same  Hebrew  phrase,  n'i^N 
?in'nN-Vi<. ,  here  translated  a  wife  to  her  sister,  is  found  in  eight 
other  instances  only  in  the  whole  Hebrew  Bible  ;  in  none  of  which 
it  is  applied  to  a  natural  sister,  but  in  every  one  of  them,  it 
is  applied  to  inanimate  substances.  Thus  it  is  used  twice  in 
Exod.  26:  3,  "  The  five  curtains  shall  be  coupled  together  one  to 
another,  and  other  five  curtains,  shall  be  coupled  one  to  another." 
The  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew  is  this,  '  The  five  curtains 
shall  be  coupled  a  icoman  to  her  sister,  and  five  curtains  shall  be 
coupled  a  woman  to  her  sister.^'  The  same  phrase  occurs  in  the 
5th  verse  of  the  same  chapter;  "That  the  loops  may  take  hold 
one  of  another.  The  literal  translation  of  the  Hebrew  is,  "  The 
loops  receiving  a  woman  to  her  sister.''  Again  in  the  6th  verse  ; 
"  And  couple  the  curtains  together  ;  "  in  the  Hebrew,  "  And 
couple  the  curtains  a  woman  to  her  sister."  So  verse  17th ; 
"  Two  tenons  shall  there  be  in  one  board  set  in  order  one  against 
another  ;"  in  the  Hebrew,  "  set  in  order  a  woman  to  her  sister." 
Ezek.  1:  9,  "Their  v^^ings  were  joined  one  to  another;"  in  the 
Hebrew,  "  Their  wings  were  joined  a  woman  to  her  sister." 
Verse  23d  of  the  same  chapter,  "  And  under  the  firmament  were 
their  wings   straight,  one  toward  another ; "    in  the   Hebrew, 


MARRIAGE   OF  A  WIFe's   SISTER.  137 

"  were  straight  a  woman  to  her  sister."  Chap.  3:  13,  "  I  heard 
also  the  noise  of  the  wings  of  the  hving  creatures,  that  touched  one 
another  ;"  in  the  Hebrew,  "  that  touched  a  woman  to  her  sister." 

On  the  authority  of  Buxtorf's  Concordance  to  the  Hebrew  Bi- 
ble I  assert,  that  these  eight  are  the  only  instances  of  the  use  of 
this  phrase  in  the  whole  Hebrew  Bible,  beside  Lev.  18:  18.  And 
since  in  all  these  it  is  applied  to  inanimate  substances,  which 
cannot  in  the  literal  sense  be  sisters  to  each  other,  I  submit  it  to 
my  learned  auditors,  how  far  this  is  an  argument,  that  in  our  text 
too  it  does  not  mean  a  natural  sister.  If  it  shall  be  determined 
that  in  our  text  it  does  not  mean  a  natural  sister,  the  sense  of  the 
phrase  will  be  the  same  which  it  bears  in  all  other  places,  and  the 
translation  will  also  be  the  same  ;  thus  "  a  wife  to  another  shalt 
thou  not  take,  to  vex  her,  to  uncover  her  nakedness,  besides  the 
other  in  her  life  time." 

The  reason  assigned  for  the  prohibition  of  this  marriage,  what- 
ever it  be,  seems  to  extend  equally  to  the  marrying  of  any  other 
woman  as  to  the  marrying  of  a  wife's  sister.  The  reason  is,  that 
it  will  be  a  source  of  vexation  to  the  former  wife.  But  it  does 
not  appear,  that  women  in  general  would  be  more  vexed,  to  have 
their  own  sister  received  to  the  same  bed  with  themselves,  than 
to  have  any  other  woman  introduced  to  the  same  place. 

7.  It  is  said,  that  supposing  the  marriage  of  a  wife's  sister  is 
forbidden  in  Lev.  xviii.  and  xx  ;  yet  those  are  the  laws  of  Moses 
only  ;  and  the  laws  of  Moses  no  more  concern  us,  than  the  laws 
of  Solon  or  Lycurgus.  Ansiver.  The  laws  of  Moses  are  the 
laws  of  God ;  and  they  respected  either  the  Israelites  only,  or 
men  in  general.  Now  that  the  law  against  marrying  a  brother's 
wife  and  a  wife's  sister  respects  us  and  men  in  general,  is  a  doc- 
trine for  which  I  contend,  and  the  reasons  in  support  of  that  doc- 
trine have  been  given,  and  are  submitted  to  my  auditors.  And 
to  say  that  the  laws  of  God  respecting  us  and  our  conduct,  no 
more  concern  us,  than  the  laws  of  Solon  and  Lycurgus,  must  be 
very  extraordinary  in  any  who  believe  the  divine  existence. 

8.  It  is  pleaded,  that  the  case  of  marrying  a  wife's  sister  is 
very  different  from  that  of  marrying  a  brother's  widow  ;  that 
there  are  very  few,  if  any,  instances  in  which  a  man  marries  or 
wishes  to  marry  his  brother's  widow.  But  the  instances  of  men 
who  marry  or  wish  to  marry  their  wives'  sisters  are  very  numer- 
ous ;  which  shows,  that  the  feelings  of  human  nature  are  very 
different  in  the  different  cases  ;  that  the  minds  of  men  in  general 
revolt  from  the  idea  of  marrying  a  brother's  widow,  but  not  at  all 
from  the  idea  of  marrying  a  wife's  sister,  and  that  therefore  we 
cannot  justly  argue  from  the  one  of  these  cases  to  the  other. 


138  MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER. 

To  this  it  may  be  answered,  that  it  is  no  proper  matter  of  won- 
der, that  men  do  not  so  frequently  marry  or  wish  to  marry,  their 
brothers'  widows,  as  their  wives'  sisters ;  for  they  do  not  so  gen- 
erally choose  to  marry  any  widows,  as  they  do  maidens.  It  may 
be  presumed,  that  as  many  instances  may  be  produced,  in  which 
men  have  wished  to  marry  their  brother's  widows,  as  can  be  pro- 
duced in  which  they  have  wished  to  marry  their  wives'  sisters 
who  were  widows.  If  women  were  at  liberty  to  make  overtures 
toward  marriage,  we  might  expect  as  many  instances  of  such 
overtures  made  to  husbands'  brothers  as  are  now  made  to  wives' 
sisters  ;  which  would  showj  that  human  nature  no  more  revolts 
from  the  idea  of  marrying  a  brother's  widow,  than  from  that  of 
marrying  a  wife's  sister. 

9.  It  is  further  pleaded,  that  since  the  violations  of  both  the 
law  of  Moses  and  the  law  of  the  state,  are  become  so  frequent, 
and  yet  the  offenders  are  not  prosecuted  ;  this  shows,  that  the 
general  sense  of  mankind  is  against  the  law  and  justifies  the  mar- 
riages. Answer.  It  is  not  allowed  that  this  consequence  follows 
from  the  premises.  Other  laws,  which  all  allow  to  be  good,  are  very 
frequently  broken,  and  yet  the  offenders  are,  according  to  their 
number,  much  more  rarely  piosecuted,  than  the  offenders  against 
the  law  in  question  ;  for  instance,  the  law  against  drunkenness. 
To  commence  prosecutor  or  complainer,  is  an  invidious  task,  and 
therefore  men  will  rarely  undertake  it,  though  they  frequently  see 
crimes  committed,  which  they  utterly  abominate. 

10.  Another  argument  in  favor  of  the  marriage  which  I  op- 
pose, is  that  no  person  is  so  suitable  to  come  into  the  place  of  a 
deceased  wife,  or  is  so  likely  to  be  kind  to  her  motherless  chil- 
dren, as  her  own  sister.  But  if  the  word  of  God  have  forbidden 
this  marriage,  we  are  bound  to  obey  that,  rather  than  to  act  on 
our  own  ideas  of  suitableness  in  the  case.  This  argument  there- 
fore, like  several  of  the  forementioned,  takes  for  granted  the  main 
point  in  dispute,  that  this  marriage  is  not  forbidden  in  scripture. 
If  it  were  ever  so  true,  that  the  sister  of  a  deceased  wife  is  more 
likely,  than  any  person  not  related,  to  take  a  kind  care  of  the 
children  of  him  who  has  lost  his  wife,  this  alone  would  not  justi- 
fy him  in  marrying  that  sister.  For  the  man's  own  sister  might 
be  still  more  likely  to  take  a  kind  care  of  his  children.  Yet  it 
would  not  be  hence  inferred,  that  he  has  a  right  to  marry  his  own 
sister.  To  reply,  that  this  is  forbidden  in  scripture,  is  to  say  no 
more  than  we  say  with  regard  to  the  marriage  of  a  wife's  sister. 
So  that  the  whole  question  is  not,  who  is  most  likely  to  be  kind 
to  the  motherless  children,  but  what  is  the  law  of  God? 

Besides  ;  it  is  by  no  means  a  conceded  point,  that  the  sister  of 


MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER.  139 

a  deceased  woman,  married  to  her  husband,  is  more  hkely  than 
another  person  to  be  kind  to  her  children.  It  is  said  that  or- 
phans have  been  more  frequently  ill-treated  and  murdered  by  un- 
cles and  aunts,  than  by  any  other  persons. 

11.  It  is  urged.  That  it  is  the  design  of  these  chapters  in  Le- 
viticus to  preserve  the  natural  dignity  of  the  several  relations  of 
mankind,  and  not  to  suffer  such  marriages  to  be  contracted,  as 
are  inconsistent  with  the  natural  superiority  which  some  persons 
have,  in  consequence  of  the  relation  in  which  they  naturally 
stand  to  others.  But  there  is  no  such  natural  superiority  of  a 
wife's  sister,  to  her  sister's  husband.  Therefore  marriage  be- 
tween them  is  lawful.  Ansiver.  Neither  is  there  any  natural  su- 
periority of  a  brother's  wife  to  her  husband's  brother.  Yet  her 
marriage  with  him  is  expressly  forbidden.  There  is  no  more  of 
a  natural  superiority  in  a  father's  brother's  wife  to  her  husband's 
nephew,  than  there  is  in  a  mother's  brother's  wife  to  her  hus- 
band's nephew.  Yet  marriage  in  the  former  case  is  expressly 
forbidden,  but  not  in  the  latter. 

12.  It  is  also  objected,  that  the  Jewish  Robbies  admit  the  law- 
fulness of  marrying  a  wife's  sister.  But  who  made  them  an  au- 
thority ?  They  have  no  further  means  to  know  what  is  lawful  in 
this  case,  than  we  have.  We  have  the  scriptures  as  well  as  they. 
Besides ;  the  Rabbies  are  those  among  the  Jews  who  hold  the 
obligation  of  their  traditions,  or  oral  law,  those  very  traditions, 
which  our  Lord  so  severely  condemned.  But  the  Caraites,  a  sect 
of  the  Jews  who  hold  the  obligation  of  the  written  law  only,  in 
opposition  to  those  vain  and  wicked  traditions,  deny  the  lawful- 
ness of  this  marriage  ;  as  did  also  the  ancient  Grecians,  Romans 
and  Arabians. 

13.  In  favor  of  repealing  the  law  of  the  state  against  marrying 
a  wife's  sister  it  is  urged,  that  since  the  marriage  in  question  is 
allowed  in  the  neighboring  states  the  law  of  this  state  against 
it  answers  no  good  purpose.  Whoever  wishes  to  contract  such 
a  marriage,  will  go  into  one  of  the  adjoining  states  and  be  mar- 
ried. But  the  main  question  is,  whether  the  marriage  in  ques- 
tion be  a  lawful  marriage  ;  whether  it  be  right  in  the  sight  of 
God,  and  be  subservient  to  good  morals  and  good  policy.  If 
not,  however  other  states  may  countenance  it,  this  state  is  by  no 
means  at  liberty  to  do  the  same. 

Equally  trifling  and  more  humiliating  is  it,  to  bring  the  repeal 
of  the  laws  of  the  adjacent  states  against  marrying  a  wife's  sister, 
as  an  authority  that  we  ought  to  do  the  same.  If  none  of  the 
good  citizens  of  this  state  be  capable  of  understanding  and  judg- 
ing of  this  subject ;  it  seems  advisable  and   necessary  to  import 


140  MARRIAGE  OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER. 

some  men  of  understanding  and  learning,  who  shall  be  able  to 
judge  for  us. 

If  after  weighing  the  arguments  in  favor  of  the  doctrine  for 
which  I  plead,  together  with  the  objections  and  the  answers  to 
them,  any  should  remain  doubtful  and  undetermined  concerning 
the  question  ;  it  is  certainly  advisable  to  be  on  the  safe  side. 
A  man  commits  no  crime  in  marrying  some  other  person  beside 
his  wife's  sister  ;  but  whether  he  will  not  commit  a  real  crime,  a 
real  violation  of  the  divine  law,  in  marrying  his  wife's  sister,  is 
at  least  a  very  disputable  point.  Prudence  therefore  plainly 
points  out  to  him  what  part  to  act.  And  considering,  that  we 
are  required  to  abstain  from  all  appearance  of  evil,  who  can  with 
a  good  conscience  willingly  go  as  near  the  verge  of  evil  as  pos- 
sible, and  yet  not  come  within  it  ?  In  another  point  of  view  is 
it  expedient  for  a  man  to  marry  his  wife's  sister  ?  By  such  a 
marriage  he  would  deeply  grieve  and  wound  the  most  of  his 
christian  brethren.  And  willingly  to  do  this,  is  to  feel  and  to 
act  very  differently  from  the  apostle  Paul,  who  would  not  eat 
meat  so  long  as  the  world  should  stand,  if  thereby  he  should  of- 
fend his  christian  brethren. 

Thus  I  have  taken  a  brief  survey  of  the  subject  assigned  me 
by  the  General  Association.  And  whether  or  not  I  have  given 
satisfaction  to  my  learned  and  respectable  hearers,  I  hope  they 
will  with  candor  receive  my  well  meant  attempt. 

I  have  briefly  stated  the  evidence  from  scripture  and  reason, 
that  the  marriage  in  question  is  unlawful,  and  have  carefully  at- 
tended to  the  objections  to  the  doctrine  ;  and  it  is  humbly  con- 
ceived, that  the  result  of  our  inquiry  is,  that  this  marriage  is  as 
plainly  and  fully  forbidden  by  God,  as  several  other  marriages, 
which  we  all  acknowledge  to  be  forbidden  ;  as  the  marriage  of  a 
grandson,  the  marriage  of  a  mother's  brother's  wife,  and  the  mar- 
riage of  a  husband's  grandson,  etc.  To  be  consistent  therefore 
we  seem  to  be  necessitated,  either  to  hold  that  these  marriages 
are  not  forbidden,  or  to  acknowledge  that  the  marriage  of  a  wife's 
sister  is  forbidden. 

In  these  times  of  revolution  and  innovation,  some  seem  dis- 
posed to  innovate  in  everything,  religious  and  moral,  as  well  as 
political ;  to  throw  by  old  practices  and  old  opinions,  without  in- 
quiring whether  they  be  well  or  ill  founded  ;  and  to  change 
merely  for  the  sake  of  change  ;  or  rather  under  the  pretence  of 
liberty,  originality  and  improvement,  to  throw  off  all  restraint  in 
morals  and  religion.  This  surely  cannot  be  reconciled  with  scrip- 
ture or  reason  ;  with  good  sense  or  with  common  prudence. 

Though  some  among  other  changes  and  revolutions  are  al- 


MARRIAGE   OF  A  WIFe's  SISTER.  141 

ready  prepared,  and  are  endeavoring  to  effect  one  with  respect  to 
the  subject  which  has  now  been  under  consideration  ;  yet  it  is 
to  be  hoped,  that  our  legislators,  our  churches,  and  the  ministers 
of  the  gospel  will  not  proceed  to  any  innovation  in  this  case, 
without  proper  deliberation  ;  that  they  will  carefully  consult  the 
voice  of  reason,  and  consider  how  far  the  general  practice  of  mar- 
rying wives'  sisters  will  conduce  to  the  preservation  of  the  purity 
of  the  morals  of  the  people,  how  far  it  will  extend  or  limit  those 
social  connections  between  diflferent  families,  which  cement  soci- 
ety, promote  improvement,  friendship  and  kind  offices  among  the 
diflerent  constituent  parts  of  the  community  ;  how  far  it  will  tend 
to  keep  particular  families  by  themselves,  and  unconnected  with 
their  fellow  citizens,  and  how  far  this  will  tend  to  promote  nar- 
rowness, selfishness,  mutual  jealousy  and  enmity  among  fellow 
citizens,  and  aristocracy  and  civil  broils  in  the  state. 

The  lower  classes  of  mankind  are  naturally  jealous  and  envious 
toward  the  great  and  affluent.  But  will  not  the  practice  of  mar- 
rying wives'  sisters  naturally  tend  to  keep  the  great  and  the  af- 
fluent unconnected  with  the  rest  ?  And  whether  that  especially 
in  a  republican  government,  like  our  own,  can  be  subservient  to 
the  public  good,  and  whether  it  will  not  naturally  tend  to  aris- 
tocracy, I  leave  every  one  to  determine. 

But  above  all,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  that  before  any  innovation  is 
made  in  this  matter,  all  concerned,  and  especially  our  legislators, 
our  churches  and  the  ministers,  will  carefully  consult  the  voice  of 
scripture,  and  the  revealed  will  of  God.  To  the  law  and  to  the 
testimony ;  if  we  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is  because 
there  is  no  light  in  us.  And  if  there  it  shall  be  found,  that  the 
marriage  in  question  is  by  plain  implication  forbidden  in  the  same 
manner  as  several  other  marriages,  as  the  marriage  of  a  grandson, 
the  marriage  of  a  mother's  brother's  wife,  the  marriage  of  a  hus- 
band's grandson,  etc.  which  we  all  acknowledge  to  be  forbidden  ; 
the  consequence  is  plain,  that  ministers,  churches  and  all  indi- 
vidual members  of  our  churches  are  bound  to  unite  their  influ- 
ence against  a  growing  evil.  Our  legislators,  also,  are  bound  in 
their  capacity  to  uphold  the  truth,  and  to  be  deaf  to  the  frequent 
solicitations  of  innovators,  praying  for  the  repeal  of  a  wholesome 
law  of  the  state,  founded  on  the  word  of  God. 


Vol.  II.  13 


SERMON  VIII. 


FAITH    AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE  ILLUSTRATED.* 

]  TiMOTHT  1 :  19. — Holding  faith  and  a  good  conscience. 

These  words  are  closely  connected  in  sense  with  the  preced- 
ing, which  are  these  :  "  This  charge  I  commit  unto  thee,  son 
Timothy,  according  to  the  prophecies  which  went  before  on  thee, 
that  thou  mightest  war  a  good  warfare."  Then  follows  the  text, 
"  Holding  faith  and  a  good  conscience."  Timothy  was  a  young 
man  introduced  into  the  ministry  by  Paul  his  spiritual  father,  who 
charged  him,  in  the  execution  of  his  ministry,  to  war  a  good  war- 
fare, holding  faith  and  a  good  conscience ;  to  fight  valiantly  as  a 
good  soldier  of  Jesus  Christ,  having  and  retaining,  under  all  trials 
and  temptations,  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel,  and  a  good  con- 
science ;  which  he  could  do  in  no  other  way,  than  by  faithfully 
discharging  the  various  duties  of  the  ministry. 

Our  text  therefore   naturally  suggests  two  subjects  of  inquiry. 

I.  What  is  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel  ? 

II.  What  is  to  be  done  by  a  minister  of  the  gospel  that  he 
may  hold  a  good  conscience  ? 

I.   What  is  the  true  faith  of  the  gospel  7 

By  the  true  faith  is  intended  that  which  is  saving  or  justifying, 
or  which  is  accounted  for  righteousness  to  all  those  who  are  the 
subjects  of  it.  It  is  a  matter  of  great  importance  that  we  have 
just  ideas  of  that  faith,  which  is  the  necessary  prerequisite  and 
absolute  condition  of  our  justification.  I  hope  therefore  this  nu- 
merous auditory  will  afford  their  patient  attention,  while  we  en- 
deavor to  investigate  the  nature  of  this  cardinal  christian  grace. 

It  is  manifest,  that  by  justifying  faith,  the  scripture  always 
means  such  a  faith  as  implies,  or  is  certainly  connected  with,  a 
compliance  with  the  gospel.  By  compliance  with  the  gospel  I 
mean  an  obedience  to  the  precepts  of  it,  those  which  relate  to  the 
temper  and  affections  of  the  heart,  as  well  as  those  which  relate 

*  Preached  at  the  ordination  of  the  Reverend  William  Brown,  to  the  pas- 
toral office  of  the  first  church  in  Glastenbury,  on  the  27th  of  June,  1792, 
and  printed  at  the  request  of  the  hearers. 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  143 

to  the  external  actions  of  life.  Those  which  relate  to  the  affec- 
tions of  the  heart,  are  those  which  require  reconciliation  to  God, 
sincere  and  supreme  love  to  Him,  repentance  of  sin,  reconciliation 
to  the  gospel,  and  especially  to  Christ,  the  great  subject  of  the 
gospel,  and  sincere  love  to  our  fellow  men.  No  man  complies 
with  the  gospel,  whatever  his  external  conduct  may  be,  with- 
out these  gracious  affections.  And  these  will  naturally  lead  to 
external  compliance,  both  in  a  conscientious  attendance  on  the 
institutions  of  divine  worship,  and  in  a  conscientious  observance 
of  the  duties  of  a  strict  morality,  in  justice,  truth,  fidelity  and 
beneficence. 

That  by  true  and  saving  faith,  the  gospel  means  such  a  faith, 
as  either  implies  in  its  very  nature,  or  infers  as  a  necessary  con- 
sequence, such  a  compliance  with  the  gospel  as  has  been  now 
described,  is  manifest  from  various  considerations.  Any  other 
faith,  than  that  which  implies,  or  is  connected  with  compliance 
with  the  gospel,  is  called  a  dead  faith,  and  is  condemned  as  not 
saving. 

James  2:  14,  "What  doth  it  profit,  my  brethren,  though  a 
man  have  faith,  and  have  not  works?  Can  faith  save  him?" 
Plainly  importing,  as  you  see,  that  a  faith  which  does  not  imply, 
or  is  not  connected  with  good  works,  is  unprofitable  and  not  sav- 
ing. See  also  the  17th  verse  of  the  same  chapter,  "Even  so 
faith,  if  it  hath  not  works,  is  dead,  being  alone."  Obedience  to 
the  gospel  is  constantly  spoken  of  as  necessary  to  salvation,  and 
those  who  disobey  it  are  constantly  said  not  to  be  entitled  to  sal- 
vation, but  to  be  exposed  to  damnation.  As  Matt.  8:  26,  Every 
one  that  heareth  the  sayings  of  Christ,  and  doeth  them  not,  is 
likened  unto  a  foolish  man  who  built  his  house  upon  the  sand, 
and  it  fell  with  a  great  catastrophe.  But  he  that  heareth  the 
sayings  of  Christ  and  doeth  them,  is  likened  to  a  wise  man,  that 
built  upon  a  rock ;  so  that  his  house  stood,  and  he  obtained  the 
end  of  his  labor  in  building  it.  James  1:  23,  "  If  any  man  be  a 
hearer  of  the  word  and  not  a  doer,  he  is  like  unto  a  man  beholding 
his  face  in  a  glass.  For  he  beholdeth  himself,  and  goeth  his  way, 
and  straightway  forgetteth  what  manner  of  man  he  was.  But 
whoso  looketh  into  the  perfect  law  of  liberty  and  continueth  there- 
in, he  being  not  a  forgetful  hearer  but  a  doer  of  the  work,  this 
man  shall  be  blessed  in  his  deed."  John  8:  31,  "  If  ye  continue 
in  my  word  then  are  ye  my  disciples  indeed."  Chap.  15:  14, 
"  Ye  are  my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command  you."  Now 
he  that  has  saving  faith  is  blessed  with  a  sure  title  to  salvation. 
But  no  man  is  thus  blessed,  but  he  who  continueth  in  the  law  of 
liberty  and  is  a  doer  of  the  work  which  it  prescribes.     Therefore 


144  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

between  saving  faith  and  the  doing  of  this  work,  there  is  an  es- 
tabhshed  connection.  Those  who  have  saving  faith,  are  Christ's 
real  friends  and  his  disciples  indeed.  But  none  are  entitled  to 
these  characters,  but  those  who  continue  in  Christ's  word  and  do 
whatsoever  he  hath  commanded.  Therefore  saving  faith  and 
compliance  with  the  gospel  are  infallibly  connected. 

The  same  truth  appears  from  this,  that  love  to  God,  love  to 
Christ,  repentance  of  sin,  universal  love  to  mankind,  and  love  to 
the  brethren  are  throughout  the  gospel,  represented  as  absolutely 
necessary  to  salvation.  Rom.  8:  7,  "  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity 
against  God."  But  "  to  be  carnally  minded  is  death  ;"  and  only 
"  to  be  spiritually  minded  is  life  and  peace  ;"  "  and  they  that  are 
in  the  flesh,  cannot  please  God."  "  If  any  man  love  not  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  let  him  be  anathema  maranatha."  "  Repent 
ye  therefore  and  be  converted,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out." 
"  Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  John  2:  9,  10, 
"He  that  saith,  he  is  in  the  light,  and  hateth  his  brother,  is  in 
darkness  even  until  now.  He  that  loveth  his  brother,  abideth  in 
the  light."  Chap.  3:  14,  15,  "We  know  that  we  have  passed 
from  death  unto  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren  ;  he  that  lov- 
eth not  his  brother,  abideth  in  death.  Whosoever  hateth  his 
brother,  is  a  murderer  ;  and  ye  know  that  no  murderer  hath  eter- 
nal life  abiding  in  him."  1  Cor.  13:  1 — 4,  "  Though  I  speak 
with  the  tongues  of  men  and  of  angels,  and  have  not  charity,  I 
am  become  as  sounding  brass  and  a  tinkling  cymbal.  And  though 
I  have  the  gifts  of  prophecy,  and  understand  all  mysteries,  and 
all  knowledge,  and  though  I  have  all  faith,  so  that  I  could  re- 
move mountains,  and  have  not  charity  ;  I  am  nothing.  And 
though  I  bestow  all  my  goods  to  feed  the  poor,  and  though  I  give 
my  body  to  be  burned,  and  have  not  charity  ;  it  profiteth  me 
nothing." 

These  are  a  few  of  the  scriptural  testimonies  to  the  absolute 
necessity  of  cordial  compliance  with,  the  gospel,  in  order  to  an 
inheritance  of  the  saving  blessings  of  it.  But  saving  faith  is  ab- 
solutely connected  with  those  blessings.  It  follows  therefore, 
that  saving  or  justifying  faith  either  involves  in  its  very  nature, 
or  is  indissolubly  connected  with  a  cordial  compliance  with  the 
gospel,  in  heart  and  life. 

If  this  then  be  an  established  principle,  our  next  inquiry  will 
be.  What  kind  of  faith  is  that,  which  either  involves,  or  is  cer- 
tainly connected  with,  a  cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel. 

To  this  inquiry  I  answer,  that  a  mere  intellectual,  speculative 
or  doctrinal  assent  to  the  gospel  is  not  certainly  connected  with 
a  cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel.     This  is  evident  from  sev- 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  145 

eral  considerations.  First,  from  this,  that  this  kind  of  faith  exists 
in  perfection  in  the  devils  and  damned.  James  2:  19,  "  Tiioa 
behevest  that  there  is  one  God  ;  thou  dost  well ;  the  devils  also 
believe  and  tremble."  If  it  be  said,  that  we  cannot  argue  from 
the  case  of  the  devils,  as  they  are  in  a  reprobate  state,  whereas 
we  are  in  a  state  of  probation  ;  and  though  belief  in  the  devils  is 
not  followed  with  reconciliation,  it  may  be  followed  with  that  ef- 
fect in  us,  who  are  in  a  state  of  probation ;  to  this,  I  reply,  that 
belief  in  the  reprobate  will  produce  all  the  effect,  which  it  will 
produce  in  men  who  are  in  a  state  of  probation,  except  that  which 
arises  from  the  prospect  of  the  favor  of  God,  and  which  is  there- 
fore the  fruit  of  our  natural  self-love.  But  love  to  God  and  Christ 
from  the  motives  of  mere  self-love,  were  it  to  ever  so  great  a  degree 
to  follow  from  doctrinal  faith,  would  be  no  true  and  saving  com- 
pliance with  the  gospel.  "  If  ye  love  those  that  love  you,  what 
thank  have  ye  ?  Do  not  even  the  publicans  the  same  ?"  If  ye 
follow  Christ  merely  because  of  the  loaves,  how  are  ye  better  than 
the  unbelieving  Jews  ? 

Besides,  the  very  argument  of  the  apostle  James  in  the  text  just 
cited  from  him,  is,  that  if  we  have  no  other  faith  than  the  devils 
have,  we  have  no  evidence  of  a  title  to  salvation.  It  is  as  if  the 
apostle  had  said.  Thou  believest,  that  there  is  one  God  ;  so  far  is 
Avell ;  yet  this  is  no  proof  that  thy  faith  is  saving ;  because  the 
devils  have  the  same  faith,  w^hich  is  a  full  proof  that  thy  faith  is 
essentially  defective.  But  on  the  principle  of  the  objection,  an 
answer  to  this  reasoning  of  the  apostle  would  have  been  at  hand. 
The  answer  is  this  :  but  if  the  devils  have  the  same  faith  which  I 
have,  this  is  no  proof,  but  that  my  faith  is  genuine  and  saving. 
For  they  are  not  in  a  state  of  probation.  Therefore  that  faith, 
which  is  not  saving  to  them  now,  would  be  saving  to  them,  were 
they  in  such  a  state  as  I  am  in  ;  and  it  is  no  objection  to  the  gen- 
uineness of  my  faith,  or  to  its  sure  connection  with  salvation,  that 
the  devils  have  the  same.  Thus  unless  we  allow,  that  the  apos- 
tle under  inspiration  argues  inconclusively  ;  we  must  believe,  that 
the  faith  of  devils,  or  a  merely  speculative  and  doctrinal  faith, 
has  no  certain  connection  with  a  real  and  saving  compliance  with 
the  gospel. 

If  a  merely  speculative  faith  have  a  natural  tendency  to  compli- 
ance with  the  gospel,  or  be  certainly  connected  with  compliance, 
what  is  the  dead  faith  of  which  the  scriptures  speak  ?  On  this  prin- 
ciple it  will  follow,  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as  a  dead  faith  which 
is  without  saving  profit ;  of  which  however  the  scripture  makes  ex- 
press mention.  If  speculative  faith  be  certainly  connected  with 
compliance  with  the  gospel,  all  who  have  it  will  certainly  be  saved, 

13* 


146  TAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

and  it  naturally  tends  to  this  compliance.  And  if  it  naturally  tend 
to  this  compliance,  it  is  a  lively,  operative  faith,  a  faith  which 
worketh  by  love.  If  so,  what  is  a  dead  faith  ?  If  it  should  be 
said,  that  a  speculative  faith,  in  some  low  degree,  is  a  dead  faith  ; 
but  in  a  higher  degree,  it  worketh  by  love,  the  answer  is  easy  ; 
that  if  this  be  the  general  nature  of  a  speculative  faith,  it  will  in 
all  its  various  degrees  more  or  less  work  by  love.  It  will  in  its 
lowest  degree  have  the  same  tendency  in  kind,  as  in  its  highest  ; 
and  will  actually  be  followed  with  something  of  the  same  effect ; 
and  that  according  to  the  degree  of  it ;  as  genuine  and  sincere 
love  to  God,  in  its  lowest  exercises,  tends  to  the  proper  effects  of 
love,  and  actually  produces  those  effects  according  to  the  mea- 
sure of  the  love  itself.  Not  even  the  lowest  degree  of  this  love 
can  be  called  a  dead  love.  So  if  the  nature  of  speculative  faith 
were  of  the  like  tendency  to  a  compliance  with  the  gospel,  none 
of  its  exercises  could  be  called  a  dead  faith.  If  mere  speculative 
faith,  in  which  is  involved  no  emotion  of  the  heart  or  will,  be  the 
saving  faith  of  the  gospel,  saving  faith  is  not  of  a  moral  nature,  the 
exercise  of  it  is  not  a  duty,  and  the  omission  of  it  or  unbelief,  is 
no  sin  ;  and  it  is  as  absurd  to  exhort  a  man  to  believe,  as  to  ex- 
hort a  blind  man  to  see  the  sun  ;  as  absurd  to  threaten  him  for 
unbelief,  as  to  threaten  a  deaf  man  for  not  hearing  the  sound  of  a 
trumpet ;  as  absurd  to  praise  and  reward  a  man  for  believing,  as 
to  praise  and  reward  him  for  feeling  the  warmth  of  a  summer's 
day  ;  and  as  absurd  to  blame  and  punish  a  man  for  unbelief,  as 
to  blame  and  punish  an  idiot  for  not  seeing  the  truth  of  a  mathe- 
matical theorem. 

Yet  nothing  is  plainer  in  the  scripture,  than  that  mankind  are 
constantly  exhorted  to  believe  ;  are  threatened  for  unbelief ;  are 
entitled  by  faith  to  the  reward  of  eternal  life  ;  and  unbelief  is 
properly  called  the  damning  sin.  These  things  it  is  conceived 
clearly  demonstrate,  that  the  saving  faith  of  the  gospel  is  a  moral 
act,  an  exercise  or  emotion  of  the  heart  or  will,  and  not  of  the  in- 
tellect only. 

If  it  should  be  still  thought,  that  a  speculative  faith,  if  raised  to 
a  proper  degree,  will  lead  the  subject  to  a  cordial  compliance 
with  the  gospel ;  without  repeating  what  has  been  already  said, 
that  on  that  supposition  it  will  according  to  the  degree  of  it,  have 
the  same  effect  even  in  the  smallest  exercises ;  that  faith  is  not  a 
moral  act,  nor  a  proper  matter  of  exhortation,  command  and  re- 
ward ;  nor  unbelief  a  proper  matter  of  dehortation,  threatening  and 
punishment ;  it  may  be  further  observed,  that  on  that  supposition 
legeneration  is  no  change  in  the  heart  or  temper,  but  wholly  a 
change  in  the  intellect,  or  it  consists  in  a  new  revelation ;  conse- 


FAITH  ANB  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  147 

quBntly  a  man  to  whom  that  change  or  that  revelation  is  not  given, 
is  no  more  blamable  for  not  beheving,  than  they  to  whom  the 
sacraments  of  the  New  Testament  have  not  been  made  known, 
are  to  be  blamed  for  not  observing  them.  The  unbeliever  in  this 
case  is  the  proper  object  of  pity,  but  not  of  reprehension. 

Further,  the  principle  which  I  am  opposing,  implies,  that  the 
heart  of  man  is  not  naturally  depraved  ;  because  as  soon  as  the 
increase  of  the  capacity  or  the  new  revelation  is  given  to  the  in- 
tellect, the  heart  immediately  receives  the  truth  and  complies 
with  it.  The  heart,  therefore,  is  previously  and  naturally  dis- 
posed aright,  and  so  is  not  depraved  ;  or  at  least  not  so  depraved, 
but  that  as  soon  as  the  requisite  increase  of  capacity  or  the  reve- 
lation is  given  to  the  intellect,  the  heart  immediately  and  readily 
complies ;  which  is  directly  contrary  to  all  that  the  scriptures 
teach  us  concerning  the  entire  depravity  of  the  human  heart  by 
nature. 

If  man,  as  soon  as  sufficient  knowledge  or  light  is  communi- 
cated to  him,  cheerfully  receive  and  comply  with  it,  he  is  un- 
doubtedly previously  disposed  to  comply  with  it.  And  he  that  is 
disposed  to  comply  with  the  light  of  truth,  is  not  surely  totally 
depraved,  but  has  a  heart  friendly  to  the  truth  ;  and  that  is  a  good 
heart,  and  not  a  heart  totally  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.  He 
who  is  disposed  to  comply  with  the  light  of  truth,  as  it  appears, 
is  already  disposed  to  act  according  to  the  best  of  his  knowledge  ; 
or,  to  express  it  in  familiar  language,  he  is  disposed  to  do  as  well 
as  he  knows  how  to  do.  And  what  more  can  be  required  of  any 
man  than  this  ?  Such  a  man  is  so  far  from  being  totally  de- 
praved, as  the  scripture  teaches  us  that  mankind  arc  by  nature, 
that  he  is  totally  disposed  to  act  and  live  aright ;  or  in  other 
words,  he  is  totally  sanctified ;  and  he  needs  only  to  have  the 
capacity  and  knowledge  of  an  archangel,  and  he  will  be  as  holy. 

These  are  some  of  the  considerations,  which  seem  to  prove, 
that  a  mere  speculative  faith  neither  involves  nor  is  certainly 
connected  with  a  cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel,  and  there- 
fore cannot  be  justifying  and  saving  faith. 

But  if  beside  the  assent  of  the  understanding  to  the  truth  of  the 
gospel,  we  take  into  our  idea  of  faith  the  consent  of  the  heart  or 
will ;  such  a  faith  does  involve  or  is  certainly  connected  with  a 
cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel. 

He  who  cordially  consents  to  the  scheme  of  the  gospel,  re- 
joices in  it ;  and  he  who  rejoices  in  that  scheme  rejoices  in  Jesus 
Christ,  the  great  subject  of  the  scheme.  He  who  rejoices  in 
Christ,  will  rejoice  in  God,  and  love  him  sincerely  and  supremely. 
He  who  loves  God,  will  love  his  law,  and  love  to  obey  it.     He 


148  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE, 

who  loves  the  law,  will  abhor  every  violation  of  it,  his  own  viola- 
tions of  it  in  particular,  and  will  repent  in  dust  and  ashes.  He 
who  loves  God  and  is  benevolently  disposed  to  the  interest  of  his 
kingdom,  will  be  benevolent  to  all  intelligent  creatures,  so  far  as 
is  consistent  with  the  prosperity  of  God's  kingdom ;  and  there- 
fore will  sincerely  love  his  fellow  men  in  general,  and  particularly 
those  who  appear  to  be  friends  to  the  same  kingdom  of  God  and 
to  be  the  subjects  of  it.  He  who  is  the  subject  of  these  inward 
graces,  will  of  course  go  into  an  external  conduct  correspondent 
to  them.  Thus  will  he  who  is  the  subject  of  that  faith  which 
contains  a  consent  of  heart,  as  well  as  an  assent  of  the  under- 
standing to  the  truth,  naturally  and  certainly  yield  a  cordial  com- 
pliance with  the  gospel. 

This  then  must  be  that  faith  which  the  scriptures  consider  as 
justifying  and  saving  ;  as  they  certainly  do  always  consider  sav- 
ing faith  as  involving,  or  inferring  as  a  certain  consequence,  a 
cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel. 

Concerning  this  faith  and  the  nature  of  it,  several  further  in- 
quiries occur,  which  I  beg  leave  now  to  propose  and  consider. 

1.  It  is  inquired,  Why  is  this  complex  exercise,  implying  both 
an  assent  of  the  understanding  and  a  consent  of  the  will,  called 
by  the  name  of  faith  1  Or  why  must  we  understand  the  word 
faith  which  occurs  so  often  in  scripture,  in  this  complex  sense  ? 
Should  we  not  rather  understand  it  in  the  common  sense  of  the 
word,  as  meaning  a  bare  assent  of  the  understanding  to  testi- 
mony ?     Why  should  we  understand  it  in  an  unusual  sense  ? 

To  all  this  I  answer,  that  some  of  the  reasons  why  we  must 
in  this  sense  understand  the  word  faith  so  often  repeated  in 
scripture,  have  been  already  given,  and  they  need  not  be  repeat- 
ed. It  may  however  be  further  observed,  that  a  bare  assent  to 
the  gospel  could  not  properly  be  made  the  condition  of  justifica- 
tion and  salvation,  as  it  does  not  at  all  prepare  a  man  for  heaven 
or  for  pardon,  justification  or  any  of  the  special  blessings  of  the 
christian. 

To  be  prepared  for  heaven  a  man  ought  to  be  of  an  holy 
heart ;  otherwise  he  cannot  take  pleasure  in  the  displays  of  the 
divine  holiness  there  exhibited  ;  or  in  the  holy  inhabitants,  or 
in  the  holy  employments  and  holy  pleasures  of  that  holy  world. 
To  be  prepared  for  a  grateful  acknowledgment  of  the  infinite 
goodness  and  grace  of  God,  in  bestowing  on  him  heaven,  or  par- 
don and  his  special  favor  here,  a  man  must  be  fully  sensible  of  his 
own  unworthiness,  demerit  and  sinfulness,  must  be  a  real  peni- 
tent and  in  genuine  repentance  must  comply  with  the  gospel. 
There  would  manifestly  be  an  impropriety  in  granting  these  bless- 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  149 

ings  to  a  man  not  duly  sensible  of  the  infinite  grace  of  God  in 
the  bestovvment  of  them,  or  of  his  own  dependence  on  that  grace. 
Therefore  there  is  a  sufficient  reason  why  something  further  than 
mere  speculative  faith  is  made  the  condition  of  pardon  and  sal- 
vation. And  since  tlie  scriptures  use  the  word  faith  to  express 
that  complex  condition  of  pardon,  this  is  to  be  sure  a  sufficient 
reason  why  we  also  should  use  it  in  the  same  sense. 

Every  autlior  has  a  perfect  right  to  use  words  in  his  own  sense, 
provided  he  does  but  explain  or  give  notice  of  that  sense.  And 
since  the  writers  of  scripture  have  sufficiently  shown  us,  that  by 
faith  they  mean  such  abelief  of  the  gospel,  as  is  certainly  connect- 
ed with  a  compliance,  and  that  this  implies  a  cordial  consent  to 
the  truth  believed ;  therefore  they  have  acted  with  no  impropri- 
ety in  using  the  word  faith  so  as  to  include  a  cordial  consent. 

Nor  is  this  a  very  uncommon  use  of  the  word.  We  often 
say,  that  a  man  does  not  believe  a  report  or  an  information  when 
he  does  not  act  agreeably  to  it.  As  if  a  man  were  informed  that 
his  house  was  on  fire,  and  yet  he  should  not  exert  himself  to  ex- 
tinguish the  flames  or  to  escape ;  if  a  sick  man  were  informed  of 
a  remedy  for  his  disease  of  easy  acquisition  and  sure  or  most  pro- 
bable success,  and  yet  he  should  neglect  it ;  if  a  child  were 
taught  by  his  parents  a  sure  and  feasible  way  to  prosperity,  hon- 
or and  happiness  in  life,  and  the  child  in  practice  should  wholly 
disregard  it ;  we  should  naturally  in  all  these  and  many  other 
cases  say,  that  these  persons  respectively  did  not  believe  the  in- 
formation given  them.  No  wonder  therefore,  that  the  scriptures 
say  concerning  those  who  act  not  agreeably  to  the  information 
given  in  the  gospel,  that  they  believe  it  not. 

2.  It  is  also  inquired.  Why  did  not  the  scripture  make  use  of 
some  other  word  of  more  determinate  meaning,  and  which  should 
without  a  particular  explanation,  express  the  complex  act  of  the 
mind,  which  is  the  condition  of  justification  ?  To  this  it  may  be 
answered,  that  there  does  not  appear  to  be  any  word  of  more  de- 
terminate signification,  which  could  have  been  used  in  this  case. 
Suppose  the  word  receive  had  been  substituted  in  lieu  of  faith, 
still  we  must  have  explained  in  what  sense  Christ  or  the  gospel 
is  to  be  received  ;  whether  with  a  mere  speculative  assent  or 
with  a  cordial  complacency  ;  or  if  in  complacency,  whether  that 
complacency  must  be  directed  immediately  to  Christ  and  the 
gospel  themselves,  or  to  the  benefits  merely,  which  we  expect  to 
derive  from  them.  Or  if  the  word  love  had  been  the  word,  there 
would  have  been  the  same  ambiguity  concerning  the  nature  and 
ground  of  the  love,  as  was  just  now  mentioned  concerning  the 
word  receive.     If  this  act  had  been  expressed  by  the  word  trust 


15b  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

Still  we  should  have  had  to  inquire,  in  what  sense  we  are  to  trust 
in  Christ,  whether  as  a  sovereign,  claiming  and  exercising  the  right 
to  have  mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy  and  whom  he  will 
to  harden  ;  or  whether  we  are  to  trust  him  in  a  belief,  that  we  are 
the  objects  of  his  favor  and  not  otherwise.  Or  if  the  word  obe- 
dience or  compliance  had  been  chosen  instead  of  faith  ;  still  there 
are  different  senses  in  which  Christ  may  be  obeyed,  or  the  gos- 
pel complied  with.  This  obedience  may  be  external  or  internal ; 
may  proceed  from  the  motive  of  mere  self-love  or  from  sincere 
and  direct  complacency  in  the  truth. 

3.  Is  justifying  faith  an  appropriating  act  1  And  does  the 
christian  in  faith  believe,  that  Christ  is  his  Savior,  that  he  is  con- 
verted and  will  be  saved  ?  If  by  appropriation,  be  meant  choos- 
ing Christ  as  our  Savior,  wishing  to  be  saved  by  and  through 
him,  and  in  no  other  way,  entirely  approving  and  acquiescing  in 
the  method  of  salvation  proposed  in  the  gospel,  and  hoping  to  be 
saved  in  this  way  ;  doubtless  all  this  is  or  may  be  contained  in 
justifying  faith.  From  the  view  of  Christ's  sufficiency  to  save, 
the  believer  may  hope  that  he  may  be  saved  by  him,  though  he 
do  not  at  present  believe  that  he  is  interested  in  him.  But  if  by 
appropriation  be  meant  a  belief  that  we  are  now  interested  in 
Christ,  it  is  by  no  means  an  essential  part  of  saving  faith.  Such 
an  appropriation  is  not  by  any  means  necessarily  connected  with 
a  cordial  compliance  with  the  gospel.  A  man  may  have,  and 
many  have  had,  this  appropriation  to  a  very  high  degree,  and  yet 
have  lived  in  gross  immorality.  A  man  may  have  this  appropri- 
ation, and  yet  not  be  pleased  with  the  character  of  Christ  only  so 
far  as  he  conceives  or  hopes,  that  he  has  derived,  or  is  about  to 
derive  some  benefit  from  him.  He  may  still  be  greatly  displeased 
with  the  holiness  of  Christ,  and  with  his  determination  to  punish 
sin  and  sinners  continuing  in  sin.  He  may  be  displeased  with  the 
sovereignty  of  Christ  and  of  his  grace.  He  may  be  equally  dis- 
pleased with  the  gospel,  the  duties,  the  terms,  and  the  conditions  of 
it.  He  will  therefore  not  receive  either  Christ  or  the  gospel  with 
any  proper  and  direct  complacency.  In  like  manner  he  may  be 
wholly  without  any  compliance  with  the  gospel  in  sincere  and 
supreme  love  to  God,  in  a  cheerful  submission  to  him  and  to  his 
sovereign  grace  in  sincere  repentance  of  sin.  Whatever  repen- 
tance and  love  he  has,  may  be  wholly  the  fruit  of  self-love.  So 
with  respect  to  love  to  mankind  and  every  other  affection. 
Therefore  as  this  appropriation  is  by  no  means  certainly  connect- 
ed with  a  compliance  with  the  gospel,  it  cannot  be  saving  faith. 

4.  Does  saving  faith  imply  either  a  belief,  that  Christ  died  for 
him  in  particular,  who  is  the  subject  of  the  faith,  or  a  belief  that 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  151 

he  died  for  all  men  in  such  a  sense  at  least,  that  he  has  made 
atonement  for  all  ?  It  is  said  by  some  that  there  is  no  founda- 
tion for  me  to  exercise  faith  in  Christ,  but  one  or  other  of  these  ; 
a  belief  that  Christ  died  for  me  in  particular,  and  made  atone- 
ment for  my  sins  in  particular  ;  or  a  belief  that  he  hath  made 
sufficient  atonement  for  all  mankind ;  that  if  I  believe  that  he 
died  for  me  in  particular,  I  have  a  foundation  on  which  to  trust 
in  him.  Or  if  I  believe  that  he  hath  made  an  atonement  suffi- 
cient for  all  men,  I  still  have  a  foundation  on  which  I  may  trust 
in  him  for  salvation ;  but  that  beside  these  two  there  is  no  other 
foundation  for  faith  or  trust  in  him ;  that  therefore  all  those  who 
believe,  that  Christ  hath  made  atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  elect 
only,  must  have  the  appropriating  faith,  or  a  faith  which  consists 
in  believing  that  Christ  died  for  them  in  particular. 

Concerning  all  this  I  beg  leave  to  observe,  that  if  by  saving 
faith  we  mean  a  trust  or  reliance  on  Christ  in  the  persuasion,  that 
he  will  save  us,  it  must  imply  either  a  belief  that  he  died  for  us 
in  particular,  or  a  belief  that  he  died,  and  hath  made  atonement 
for  all  men.  But  if  by  saving  faith  we  mean,  as  I  conceive  that 
we  ought  to  mean,  a  firm  belief  of  the  report  and  doctrine  of  the 
gospel,  and  a  firm  belief  of  the  character,  offices,  and  sufficiency 
of  Jesus  Christ  as  a  Savior,  and  a  cordial  complacency  in  him, 
and  a  willing  acquiescence  in  the  way  of  salvation  through  him ; 
saving  faith  may  exist  in  a  man,  who  believes  neither  that  Christ 
died  for  him  in  particular,  nor  that  he  has  made  atonement  suf- 
ficient for  all  men. 

5.  Very  similar  to  the  last  mentioned,  is  the  following  inquiry  : 
Does  the  first  exercise  of  saving  faith  imply  a  trust  in  Christ  for 
salvation  ?  The  answer  wholly  depends  on  the  meaning  of  the 
expression  trust  in  Christ  for  salvation.  If  by  that  expression 
be  meant  a  confidence  that  Christ  will  save  us  in  particular ;  I 
answer,  that  this  is  not  the  first  exercise  of  saving  faith.  But  if 
by  trusting  in  Christ  be  meant  a  belief  that  Christ  is  the  only 
Savior ;  that  he  is  all-sufficient  as  a  Savior ;  that  he  is  able  to 
save  us  and  all  who  believe  in  him ;  that  we  depend  on  him  for 
salvation,  if  ever  we  are  to  be  saved,  and  that  we  wish  to  be  saved 
in  no  other  way,  entirely  approving  the  way  which  is  through 
him ;  as  all  this  may  be  contained  in  the  first  act  of  saving  faith, 
so  trusting  in  Christ  for  salvation  in  this  sense,  is  or  may  be  the 
first  act  of  faith. 

6.  Does  saving  faith  lead  to  a  compliance  with  the  gospel  ?  Is 
it  the  cause  of  that  compliance  which  consists  in  sincere  and  su- 
preme love  to  Christ,  and  to  the  Father,  genuine  repentance  of 
sin,  love  of  mankind,  etc.  ?     To  this  I  answer,  faith  itself  as  it 


152  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

has  been  now  explained,  is  at  least  in  part  a  compliance  with  the 
gospel.  To  receive  Christ  with  cordial  complacency,  is  so  far  to 
comply  with  the  gospel.  But  this  act  is  not  the  cause  of  itself. 
It  contains  in  its  nature  sincere  love  to  Christ  and  to  the  whole 
Deity  ;  therefore  it  cannot  be  the  cause  of  the  first  act  of  love  to 
God  or  to  Christ.  So,  as  faith  contains  in  its  very  nature  the  es- 
sence of  a  general  compliance  of  heart  with  the  gospel,  it  cannot 
be  the  cause  of  that  compliance.  To  be  the  cause,  it  must  be 
distinct  from  it,  and  so  distinct  from  all  cordial  complacency  in 
the  gospel.  But  that  faith  which  is  distinct  from  complacency,  is 
a  mere  speculative  faith  and  therefore  is  not  certainly  connected 
with  a  saving  compliance  with  the  gospel.  So  that  let  our  idea 
of  faith  be  what  it  may,  it  is  not  the  cause  of  compliance  with 
the  gospel.  If  faith  imply  a  cordial  consent  to  the  truth,  it  can- 
not be  the  cause  of  compliance  but  involves  it,  so  far  as  relates 
to  the  heart.  If  faith  be  a  mere  assent  of  the  understanding,  it 
cannot  be  the  cause  of  compliance,  as  there  is  no  certain  connec- 
tion between  the  one  and  the  other.  Speculative  faith  can  work 
on  those  principles  only,  which  are  in  the  heart,  but  can  never 
produce  new  principles  or  new  tastes.  Speculative  faith  con- 
cerning the  utility  of  honey  and  its  subserviency  to  health,  will 
never  produce  a  taste  for  honey  in  a  man  who  has  no  taste  for  it. 
If  a  man  had  no  sense  of  honor  or  of  shame  ;  no  information  and 
belief  concerning  the  use  and  necessity  of  that  principle  so  com- 
mon to  men,  would  produce  it  in  him.  Nor  if  a  parent  were 
without  the  principle  of  natural  affection,  would  any  speculative 
belief  concerning  it.  Or  information  concerning  his  child,  produce 
the  yearnings  and  desires  of  an  affectionate  parent.  But  where- 
ever  the  principle  exists,  it  is  easy  to  excite  its  proper  emotions. 

So  where  a  principle  of  benevolence  to  intelligent  being,  of 
love  to  God  and  to  holiness  exists,  it  is  easy  to  draw  it  forth  into 
its  proper  exercises.  But  where  no  such  principle  exists,  it  is 
impossible  to  create  the  principle  or  to  excite  the  exercises  of  love 
to  God  and  holiness  by  mere  speculative  faith. 

Many  sinners  who  have  no  doubt  concerning  the  facts  and 
doctrines  of  the  gospel,  yea,  who  have  strong  conviction  of  their 
own  sin  and  danger  in  the  view  of  those  doctrines ;  yet  pretend 
not  to  be,  and  in  fact  are  not  reconciled  to  the  gospel,  so  as  cor- 
dially to  comply  with  it,  and  perhaps  show  this  by  their  subse- 
quent lives.  Were  it  otherwise,  did  mere  speculative  faith  com- 
municate a  new  heart,  there  would  be  no  need  of  the  influence 
of  the  divine  spirit,  unless  it  were  to  increase  the  faculty  of  intel- 
lect or  to  impress  or  reveal  a  new  idea  in  it,  which  would  be  to 
produce  an  effect  not  of  a  moral  nature,  for  being  without  which 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  153 

we  are  not  blamable,  and  after  becoming  the  subjects  of  which, 
we  are  no  way  morally  better,  than  we  were  before.  This  would 
be  not  only  regeneration  by  a  physical  operation,  but  it  would  be 
a  regeneration,  which  would  produce  a  physical  effect,  as  much 
physical  as  would  be  the  effect  of  changing  the  Ethiopian's  skin 
or  of  adding  a  cubit  to  our  stature.  But  this,  as  has  been  shown, 
is  no  change  of  heart ;  nor  is  it  certainly  connected  with  a  change 
of  heart ;  and  if  it  were  certainly  connected  with  such  a  change, 
that  change  would  be  effected  by  mere  moral  suasion  and  not  by 
any  influence  of  the  Spirit  immediately  on  the  heart  or  will.  The 
increase  of  the  faculty  of  intellect  and  the  revelation  or  exhibition 
of  any  merely  intellectual  idea,  can  influence  the  heart  by  moral 
suasion  only. 

7.  Does  not  justifying  faith  consist  in  a  sight  or  view  of  the 
spiritual  glory  of  the  gospel,  or  in  that  assent  to  the  divine  origi- 
nal of  the  gospel,  which  immediately  results  from  the  view  of  its 
spiritual  glory  ?  And  is  not  this  view  of  spiritual  glory  or  this 
spiritual  light  distinct  from  the  exercise  or  complacency  of  the 
heart  ?  Is  it  not  antecedent  to  it  and  the  immediate  cause  of  it? 
This  appears  to  be  the  idea  of  some  ;  and  they  allow  that  this 
light  is  supernatural,  and  the  effect  of  the  immediate  influence  of 
the  Spirit  of  God.  To  this  I  answer :  If  this  light  be  distinct  from 
all  exercises  of  the  heart,  there  is  no  morality,  no  grace,  no  reli- 
gion in  it,  more  than  in  seeing  the  light  of  the  sun  ;  nor  are  we 
while  destitute  of  this  spiritual  light,  more  obligated  to  have  it, 
than  the  blind  man  is  to  see  the  light  of  the  sun  ;  nor  is  he  who  has 
it,  any  more  praiseworthy,  than  he  who  having  his  eyes  open  sees 
the  light  of  the  sun.  In  short,  the  observations  in  general,  which 
have  been  made  concerning  mere  speculative  faith,  are  true  with 
regard  to  this  spiritual  light,  which  is  supposed  to  be  without  all 
exercise  of  heart,  and  therefore  is  in  reality  nothing  else  but  specu- 
lative faith,  or  speculative  knowledge.  For  what  is  speculative 
knowledge,  but  knowledge  in  the  intellect  merely,  not  involving 
any  emotions  of  the  heart  or  affections  ?  And  such  this  spiritual 
light,  of  which  I  am  speaking,  is  supposed  and  described  to  be. 
As  mere  speculative  faith  cannot  produce  a  new  heart  or  holy 
love  ;  so  neither  can  spiritual  light,  if  it  be  distinct  from  all  emo- 
tion of  heart,  any  more  than  speculation  will  produce  natural  af- 
fection or  compassion,  in  him  who  is  wholly  destitute  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  those  emotions.  And  if  this  spiritual  light  did  produce 
holy  love,  it  would  produce  it  by  mere  moral  suasion,  as  it  could 
in  no  other  way  operate  on  the  mind  at  all.  This  would  exclude 
all  influence  of  the  Spirit  on  the  heart  in  regeneration  and  what- 
ever influence  of  the  Spirit  is  admitted  on  this  hypothesis,  must 

Vol.  II.  14 


154  FAITH    AND   A  GOOD    CONSCIENCE. 

be  on  the  bare  intellect,  in  enlarging  its  capacity,  or  in  commu- 
nicating a  new  revelation. 

If  it  be  said,  that  there  is  no  new  capacity  given  to  the  mind, 
nor  new  revelation  communicated,  but  a  view  of  the  beauty  and 
glory  of  old  truths  long  since  known  ;  still  if  this  glory  be  dis- 
cerned by  mere  intellect,  as  it  is,  provided  it  be  distinct  from  all 
emotion  of  heart ;  why  is  it  not  as  much  a  new  revelation  as  if 
some  new  truth  were  made  known  ? 

I  beg  leave  further  to  observe,  that  the  sight  or  apprehension 
of  beauty  or  glory  of  any  kind,  is  not  prior  to  the  love  of  that 
beauty,  nor  is  distinct  from  it.  We  do  not  first  see  the  beauty 
of  a  picture  or  of  a  countenance,  and  then  become  pleased  with 
it.  But  the  very  sight  of  the  beauty  carries  in  it  complacency.  Nor 
is  there  anything  else  in  complacency  in  a  beautiful  picture  than 
the  sight  of  its  beauty.  So  with  regard  to  beauty  and  glory  in 
general. 

8.  Is  faith  the  first  exercise  of  grace  in  the  regenerate  soul  ?  -4^1- 
swer.  If  by  faith  we  mean  a  mere  speculative  assent,  it  is  nei- 
ther the  first  nor  the  last  exercise  of  grace,  because  it  is  no  exer- 
cise of  grace  at  all.  It  is  no  more  an  exercise  of  grace  than  the 
devils  are  the  subjects  of,  while  they  believe  and  tremble.  But 
if  by  faith  we  mean  a  cordial  belief  of  the  truth,  implying  a  con- 
sent of  the  will  to  the  gospel  and  complacency  in  Christ,  this  may 
or  may  not  be  the  first  exercise  of  grace.  It  implies  regeneration 
and  a  new  heart,  or  a  new  bias  of  the  will.  This  new  heart 
once  given  may  exercise  itself  variously  as  objects  are  presented 
to  view.  Sometimes  the  first  object  coming  into  the  view  of  the 
renewed  soul  may  be  Christ  and  his  spiritual  glory  ;  of  course  the 
new  creature  will  exert  itself  in  love  to  him  and  in  cordially  re- 
ceiving him  in  his  glorious  character  as  a  Savior.  In  other  in- 
stances, the  Deity  in  general  may  be  the  first  object  occurring  to 
the  view  of  the  regenerate  soul.  In  this  case  the  first  exercise  of 
grace  will  be  love  to  God.  In  some  instances  sin  may  be  the 
first  object ;  then  the  first  exercise  of  grace  will  be  repentance. 
But  the  most  natural  order  of  the  exercise  of  the  several  graces 
seems  to  be,  love  to  God  ;  submission  to  his  law  ;  and  in  view  of 
the  righteousness  and  amiableness  of  the  law,  an  abhorrence  and 
repentance  of  sin,  which  is  the  violation  and  practical  contempt 
of  the  law  ;  in  abhorrence  of  sin  and  in  a  desire  to  be  delivered 
from  it  and  the  consequences  of  it,  an  acceptance  of  Christ  as  the 
deliverer,  or  Savior. 

Objection.  How  can  we  love  God  unless  we  believe  in  him  ? 
But  to  believe  in  God  is  faith  ;  therefore  faith  is  before  love  and 
the  foundation  of  it. 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  155 

Answer.  We  must  distinguish  between  belief  in  general  and 
faitli  in  Christ  as  the  Savior,  which  is  justifying  faith.  It  is  un- 
doubtedly true,  that  we  cannot  love  God  unless  we  believe  that 
he  exists.  But  a  bare  belief  in  the  divine  existence  is  not  justify- 
ing faith.  So  that  this  objection  proves  not,  that  justifying  faith 
is  before  any  other  exercise  of  grace.  It  only  proves,  that  some 
belief  concerning  the  object  of  any  affection,  is  necessary  to  the 
exercise  of  that  affection  ;  which  is  not  inconsistent  with  anything 
which  has  been  advanced. 

9.  What  is  the  cause  of  faith  ?  Why  does  one  man  believe 
and  not  another  ? 

Answer.  The  same  as  is  the  cause  of  any  other  grace.  God 
changes  the  heart ;  then  the  man  is  prepared  for  the  exercise  of 
any  grace,  as  truth  and  proper  objects  are  presented  ;  and  for  the 
exercise  of  faith  as  well  as  other  graces.  Thus  faith  is  the  gift 
of  God. 

10.  Is  faith  a  duty  to  which  we  are  reasonably  and  morally 
obligated  1  It  is  said,  that  faith  depends  on  evidence  ;  that  when 
evidence  is  presented,  wc  must  beheve  and  cannot  withhold  our 
assent ;  but  when  it  is  not  presented,  we  cannot  believe  ;  how 
then  can  faith  be  a  matter  of  obligation  ? 

Answer.  If  faith  were  a  mere  speculative  assent  of  the  intel- 
lect, this  reasoning  would  be  conclusive.  In  that  case  we  should 
believe  as  evidence  appeared,  and  could  not,  though  ever  so  can- 
did, believe  without  evidence.  Nor  should  we  be  blamable  un- 
less evidence  were  shut  out  by  our  prejudice.  But  faith  is  a  cor- 
dial belief  of  the  truth.  This  depends  not  merely  on  real  evi- 
dence, but  on  the  temper  of  the  heart.  Therefore  faith  is  as 
much  a  duty  as  love  to  God,  love  to  Christ,  repentance  of  sin, 
etc.  and  it  is  a  duty  for  the  same  reason  tliat  either  of  those  is  a 
duty.     And  for  the  same  reason  unbelief  is  a  great  sin. 

11.  But  how  can  it  be  the  duty  of  a  man  to  believe,  when  he 
is  dependent  on  God  for  faith  and  faith  is  his  gift  ? 

Answer.  Doubtless  it  is  the  gift  of  God  in  the  same  sense  as  any 
grace  is.  Still  it  is  a  duty.  So  love  to  God  ;  repentance  of  sin  ; 
love  to  mankind  ;  the  true  and  sincere  practice  of  justice,  truth 
and  beneficence,  are  all  his  gifts.  Yet  all  these  are  duties  of  in- 
dispensable obligation.     Just  so  is  faith  in  Christ. 

If  we  be  not  in  duty  obligated  to  the  exercise  and  practice  of  the 
several  forementioned  graces  and  virtues  ;  we  are  not  obligated 
to  anything,  but  what  is  agreeable  to  our  own  corrupt  principles 
and  biases ;  which  is  absurd  and  what  no  man  will  avow  or  vin- 
dicate. 

The  objection  which  we  are  considering  is  built  on  the  ground, 


156  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

that  nothing  is  our  duty,  with  respect  to  which  we  are  dependent 
on  God.  But  if  this  be  true,  nothing  at  all  is  our  duty,  as  we  are 
dependent  with  respect  to  everything,  and  are  independent  in 
nothing.  The  saints  are  dependent  on  God  for  grace  to  enable 
them  to  persevere  and  to  make  proficiency  in  christian  grace  ; 
and  all  men,  as  they  live  and  move  and  have  their  being  in  God, 
are  dependent  on  him  for  power  to  perform  the  most  common 
actions  of  life.  Yet  no  man  will  pretend,  that  saints  are  not  in- 
dispensably obligated  to  persevere  and  to  grow  in  grace  ;  or  that 
any  man  is  not  obligated  to  live  in  the  practice  of  kindness  and 
good  neighborhood  to  all  around  him. 

12.  But  how  is  a  man  in  duty  bound  to  believe,  when  God 
hath  not  decreed  that  he  shall  believe,  but  has  decreed  to  leave 
him  without  the  gift  of  faith  ? 

Answer.  Notwithstanding  any  divine  decree,  it  is  our  duty  to 
believe  for  the  same  reason  as  it  is  our  duty  to  do  anything  else, 
which  God  has  not  decreed  to  give  us  an  inclination  to  do  ;  for 
instance  to  read  tlie  scriptures,  to  pray,  to  worship  God  in  any 
form,  to  pay  our  just  debts,  to  speak  the  truth,  etc.  If  any  man 
neglect  any  of  these  duties,  this  very  neglect  proves,  that  God  did 
not  decree  to  influence  him  to  perform  the  duty  neglected,  but 
did  decree  to  permit  the  neglect  of  it.  "  For  God  decrees  what- 
soever cometh  to  pass."  Yet  no  man  will  hence  argue,  that  the 
man  who  neglects  those  duties,  commits  no  sin  in  that  neglect. 

It  was  the  indispensable  duty  of  Joseph's  brethren  to  love  and 
to  treat  him  with  brotherly  kindness.  Yet  they  hated  him,  con- 
spired against  him  and  sold  him  into  Egypt.  And  it  appears  by 
the  event,  that  all  this  was  agreeable  to  the  divine  decree  ;  nor 
did  this  decree  in  the  least  dissolve  their  obligation  to  him.  It 
was  the  duty  of  Judas,  to  have  loved,  reverenced  and  cleaved  to 
his  Lord.  Yet  he  hated  and  betrayed  him,  and  this  is  proved  both 
by  the  event,  and  by  the  express  declaration  of  scripture,  to  be 
agreeable  to  the  divine  decree.  But  this  decree  did  not  in  the 
least  release  Judas  from  his  obligation  to  his  Lord. 

God's  decrees  are  not  the  rule  of  our  duty ;  if  they  were,  we 
could  not  know  the  rule  of  our  duty  before  we  acted,  unless  there 
were  a  prophecy  of  the  event  ;  and  it  would  be  impossible,  that 
there  should  be  any  sin  in  the  universe,  as  God  decrees  whatso- 
ever comes  to  pass. 

1.3.  But  does  not  this  doctrine,  that  faith  is  a  duty, /avor  self- 
righteousness  1  Does  it  not  aflbrd  some  ground  of  self-applause 
to  the  sinner,  to  think  that  he  is  justified  by  faith  ;  that  faith  is  a 
duty,  a  good  work,  an  amiable  christian  grace  ;  and  that  there- 
fore, he  is  justified  by  his  good  work,  by  doing  his  duty  in  part 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE.  157 

at  least  ?  Answer.  If  by  "  justification  by  good  works"  be  meant 
justification  before  and  without  all  good  works  or  exercises  of 
grace  ;  no  doubt  every  believer  is  justified  by  good  works,  and  we 
are  so  far  from  denying  or  evading  the  charge,  that  we  avow  and 
defend  it  as  evangelical  truth.  Without  faith  it  is  impossible  to 
please  God.  Those  therefore  who  have  faith  do  please  him.  But 
they  that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  him.  Therefore  in  order 
to  please  God,  we  must  not  be  in  the  flesh,  but  in  the  spirit,  and 
must  be  sanctified  and  of  course  exercise  the  true  grace  of  God. 
If  any  man  love  not  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  let  him  be  anathema 
maranatha,  i.  e.  let  him  be  under  the  curse,  and  therefore  while 
witliout  the  love  of  Christ,  he  is  under  the  curse  ;  and  of  course 
cannot  be  in  a  state  of  justification.  "  There  is  therefore  now 
no  condemnation  to  them  that  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not 
after  the  flesh  but  after  the  spirit."  By  this  it  appears,  that  while 
we  walk  after  the  flesh  and  until  we  begin  to  walk  after  the  spirit, 
and  to  exercise  the  graces  of  the  spirit,  we  are  under  condemna- 
tion. "  To  be  carnally  minded  is  death ;  but  to  be  spiritually 
minded  is  life  and  peace."  Therefore  we  can  have  no  spiritual 
life  or  peace  with  God,  and  of  course  cannot  be  justified,  till  we 
are  spiritually  minded. 

But  if  by  justification  by  good  works,  be  meant  a  justification 
which  is  obtained  on  the  ground  of  any  merit,  satisfaction  or 
atonement  implied  in  our  good  work  or  made  by  it ;  this  I  utter- 
ly reprobate,  and  deny  that  it  is  implied  in  anything  that  has 
been  said. 

14.  Does  not  this  doctrine,  that  faith  is  the  duty  of  all  men, 
overthrow  the  doctrine  of  the  total  depravity  of  human  nature. 
If  the  exercise  of  faith  and  other  grace  be  the  indispensable  duty 
of  all  men,  will  it  not  follow,  that  there  is  some  good  principle  in 
mankind ;  some  principle  from  which  the  exercise  of  grace  may 
flow  ?  Answer.  This  by  no  means  follows.  Though  it  be  the 
duty  of  all  men  to  believe,  they  may  not  be  disposed  to  do  this 
duty.  Though  it  is  undoubtedly  the  duty  of  the  saints  to  grow 
in  grace,  and  to  persevere  in  hohness  to  the  end  of  life  ;  yet  with- 
out special  grace  they  will  not  either  persevere  or  grow  in  grace. 

II.  We  come  now  to  consider,  What  is  to  he  done  by  a  min- 
ister of  the  gospel,  that  he  may  hold  a  good  conscience  1 

As  I  have  enlarged  so  much  on  the  first  head  of  my  discourse, 
I  must  not  dwell  on  this,  but  in  general  very  summarily  observe ; 
that  he  must  be  faithful  to  his  own  soul,  and  maintain  the  con- 
stant exercise  of  divine  grace,  and  close  converse  with  God ;  he 
must  be  faithful  to  his  charge  as  a  minister ;  faithful  in  his  stu- 
dies ;  in  preaching  the  word  ;  in  his  private  dealings  with  the 

14* 


158  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

souls  of  men,  and  that  according  to  their  characters,  whether  saints 
or  sinners ;  whether  in  heahh  or  in  sickness  and  on  a  dying  bed  ; 
whether  secure  or  awakened ;  whether  moral  or  immoral.  He 
must  be  faithful  as  a  ruler  in  the  house  of  God,  and  faithfully 
dispense  the  discipline  which  Christ  has  instituted  ;  and  must  do 
it  prudently,  yet  firmly  ;  with  entire  benevolence,  yet  without  fa- 
vor or  affection,  or  respect  to  the  persons  of  men.  He  must  not 
only  conscientiously  do  what  he  believes  himself  bound  to  do ; 
but  he  must  take  care  to  inform  his  conscience  aright ;  for  in  this, 
as  well  as  in  all  other  cases,  we  arc  bound  to  judge  according  to 
truth  ;  and  we  judge  at  our  peril. 

But  passing  by  the  many  things  which  might  be  said  under  this 
head,  I  shall  relieve  your  patience  by  proceeding  immediately  to 
close  the  discourse  by  an  address, — 1.  To  the  pastor  elect.  2. 
To  the  church  and  society  in  this  town. 

I.  To  the  pastor  elect. 

My  young  friend  and  fellow-laborer, — As  the  true  and 
saving  faith  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  so  cardinal  a  subject  of 
the  gospel,  on  which  Christ  and  the  apostles  have  so  much  insist- 
ed, I  thought  it  not  unsuitable  to  the  present  occasion,  to  bring 
it  somewhat  largely  into  view,  to  explain  it  according  to  my  abil- 
ity and  to  consider  the  principal  difficulties  which  have  been  rais- 
ed concerning  it.  After  the  example  of  your  divine  Lord,  you 
are  to  preach,  "  He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ; 
and  he  that  believeth  not  shall  be  damned."  "  He  that  believeth 
on  the  Son,  hath  everlasting  life  ;  but  he  that  believeth  not 
the  Son,  shall  not  see  life  ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on 
him."  After  the  example  of  the  apostles  you  are  to  preach,  "  Be- 
lieve on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  "  This 
is  his  commandment  that  ye  believe  on  the  name  of  his  Son  Je- 
sus Christ."  The  nature  of  this  faith  I  have  attempted  to  explain. 
This  is  the  faith  which  you  are  to  preach.  You  are  not  only  to 
preach  the  necessity  of  faith  in  general  ;  but  you  are  to  explain 
the  nature  of  true  faith ;  you  are  to  distinguish  it  from  several 
things  which  are  called  faith  ;  from  a  mere  speculative  faith  ; 
from  an  appropriating  faith ;  from  a  mere  confidence  of  our  own 
good  estate  ;  from  everything  called  by  the  name  of  faith  which 
is  not  certainly  connected  with  a  compliance  with  the  gospel. 
A  mere  speculaUve  faith  is  no  duty,  and  can  with  no  propriety 
be  made  the  matter  of  exhortation.  Nor  is  the  appropriating 
faith  a  duty,  unless  we  have  evidence  of  our  interest  in  Christ. 
But  what  evidence  of  this  can  there  be  by  any  other  medium, 
than  that  of  sanctification  ?  Point  out  in  your  sermons  the  dan- 
ger of  a  false  faith,  and  warn  your  people  against  delusion  on 


FAITH  AND  A  GOOB  CONSCIENCE.*  159 

that  head.  The  danger  is  great.  Thousands  have  been  deluded 
and  thousands  probably  will  be  deluded  in  this  particular.  And 
perhaps  as  many  have  been  and  will  be  deluded  by  one  as  by  the 
other  of  the  kinds  of  false  faith  just  nnentioncd. 

If  people  have  something  more  than  a  mere  speculative  faith, 
and  together  with  their  faith,  have  emotions  of  love  ;  lead  them 
to"  inquire  of  what  kind  their  love  is  ;  whether  it  be  selfish  or  be- 
nevolent and  disinterested. 

Together  with  this  faith,  preach  those  doctrines  and  those  du- 
ties which  are  immediately  connected  with  it ;  such  as  the  new 
birth,  conversion,  repentance  unto  life,  supreme  love  to  God,  real 
and  direct  benevolence  to  mankind,  the  divine  efficacious  grace 
and  the  sovereignty  of  it,  the  saints'  perseverance,  and  endless  re- 
wards and  punishments.  Preach  the  dependence  of  man  on  God 
for  faith  as  well  as  for  grace  in  general ;  yet  preach  the  duty  of 
faith,  even  the  duty  of  all  men  to  whom  the  gospel  is  preached, 
to  repent  and  believe  the  gospel,  and  that  no  man  hath  a  right  to 
procrastinate  this  duty  at  all.  Preach  also  the  fruits  of  faith,  the 
external  conduct  naturally  flowing  from  it,  and  the  external  marks 
of  its  genuineness. 

Thus  you  will  preach  experimentally,  practically,  usefully,  and 
with  the  divine  blessing  successfully.  Thus  having  this  faith  in 
your  own  soul,  and  thus  preaching  it  to  others,  you  will  comply 
with  our  text  and  ''  hold  faith  and  a  good  conscience."  Thus 
you  will  "  be  a  good  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  nourished  up  by 
the  loords  o?  faith  and  of  sound  doctrine." 

II.  I  shall  in  very  few  words  address  myself  to  the  church  and 
society  in  this  town. 

Men,  brethren,  and  fathers, — You  also  have  heard  what 
has  been  said  concerning  the  distinguishing  nature  of  saving  faith. 
And  if  it  be  the  duty  of  your  pastor  to  preach  this  faith  ;  it  is 
your  duty  to  exercise  it,  and  to  receive  the  truth,  not  only  with  a 
speculative  assent,  but  with  a  cordial  consent.  Faith  is  a  duty 
equally  incumbent  on  you,  as  repentance,  love  to  God,  love  to 
men,  or  any  moral  virtue.  Therefore  while  any  of  you  continue 
in  unbelief  you  continue  in  sin  ;  and  you  are  to  expect  that  your 
pastor  acting  faithfully  will  reprove  you  for  this,  as  well  as  for 
any  other  sin  of  which  you  may  be  guilty  ;  that  he  will  do  what 
in  him  lies  to  convince  you  of  it ;  and  that  by  a  clear  exhibition 
of  the  necessity  of  faith,  of  the  reasonableness  of  it,  of  the  requi- 
sition of  it  by  God,  of  the  awful  consequences  of  unbelief,  and 
of  the  blessed  consequences  of  true  faith,  he  will  urge  you  to  a 
compliance  with  the  calls  in  the  gospel,  to  the  exercise  of  faith 
and  that  immediately  without  any  further  delay. 


160'  FAITH  AND  A  GOOD  CONSCIENCE. 

Labor  to  get  right  ideas  of  saving  faith.  Examine  those  which 
you  may  have  hitherto  entertained  ;  examine  whether  they  imply 
any  more  than  a  speculative  assent ;  or  at  most  an  appropriation. 
As  your  pastor  shall  make  these  distinctions,  apply  them  to  your- 
selves in  close  examination.  Take  heed  that  you  amuse  not 
yourselves  with  a  false  faith  and  false  hope. 

Just  ideas  of  the  true  faith  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  a  careful  exam- 
ination of  yourselves  with  respect  to  it,  will  happily,  not  only  tend 
to  preserve  you  from  fatal  delusion  ;  but  will  tend  to  your  growth 
in  grace.  The  clear  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  the  great  means 
appointed  by  God  of  growth  in  grace.  And  the  knowledge  of 
the  truth  in  such  a  capital  article  as  that  of  the  christian  faith,  is 
nearly  connected  with  the  knowledge  of  almost  every  important 
evangelical  truth.  It  implies  a  knowledge  of  the  gospel  in  gene- 
ral, and  particularly  a  knowledge  of  our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus 
Christ ;  and  therefore  most  directly  tends  to  general  christian  ed- 
ification. 

We  sincerely  congratulate  you  on  the  events  of  this  day  ;  that 
with  so  much  peace  and  unanimity  you  have  obtained  the  reset- 
tlement of  the  gospel  ministry  among  you. 

Cultivate  purity  and  peace  among  yourselves.  "  The  wisdom 
which  is  from  above  is  first  pure,  then  peaceable."  And  may 
there  ever  subsist  the  most  cordial  peace  between  you  and  your 
pastor.  Such  large  societies  as  you  are,  are  more  apt  to  fall 
out  by  the  ivay,  than  those  which  are  smaller ;  and  perhaps 
they  are  more  apt  to  deviate  from  purity.  Let  me  therefore  be- 
seech you  to  be  on  your  guard  in  both  these  respects.  Your  pas- 
tor is  young  and  comparatively  inexperienced  ;  therefore  you  are 
not  to  expect  so  much  from  him  on  that  account.  It  will  be 
your  duty,  in  the  arduous  work  to  which  he  is  called,  to  assist 
him  by  your  prayers,  by  your  kind  advice,  by  your  influence,  and 
by  all  the  ways  in  your  power.  Thus  while  he  is  laboring  for 
your  spiritual  good,  you  will  be  laboring  for  the  same  important 
object. 

Thus  may  you  be  -long  happy  together,  fellow-laborers,  though 
in  different  capacities  in  the  same  common  cause.  And  having 
happily  and  successfully  united  your  labors  here,  may  you  in  due 
time  be  received  unitedly  to  partake  of  the  blessed  fruits  of  your 
respective  labors,  in  the  kingdom  of  perfect  peace  and  glory, 
where  you  shall  respectively  "  rest  from  your  labors  and  your 
works  shall  follow  you." 


SERMON   IX 


DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE  OF  INFIDELITY.* 

Jonx  7:  17. — If  nny  man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  oflhc  doctrine,  ivheiher 
it  be  of  God,  or  whether  I  speak  of  myself 

Our  Lord  '•  taught  as  one  having  authority,  and  not  as  the 
scribes."  Even  liis  enemies  were  compelled  to  admire  his  abili- 
ties and  his  doctrine.  See  the  context :  "  Now  about  the  midst  of 
the  feast,  Jesus  went  up  into  the  temple  and  taught.  And  the 
Jews  marvelled,  saying.  How  knoweth  this  man  letters,  having 
never  learned  ?"  It  was  marvellous  to  them,  that  a  man  who  had 
had  no  advantages  of  education,  who  was  a  carpenter's  son,  and 
was  himself  a  carpenter,  and  of  course  could  not  have  had  much 
advantage  of  conversation  with  men  of  learning,  even  after  he 
had  arrived  at  mature  age,  should  be  able  to  teach  so  excellently, 
and  to  exhibit  a  system  of  morals  and  theology  superior  to  all  that 
had  been  taught,  not  only  by  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  but  even 
by  Moses  and  the  prophets. 

The  solution  which  our  Lord  gave  to  their  question,  is,  that  he 
received  his  doctrine  from  God.  He  answered  them,  and  said, 
"  My  doctrine  is  not  mine,  but  his  that  sent  me."  This  being 
the  fact,  it  was  no  wonder  his  doctrine  was  so  excellent,  and  that 
he  exhibited  it  in  such  an  extraordinary  manner.  At  the  same 
time  that  our  Lord  thus  professed  to  be  a  teacher  sent  from  God, 
he  informed  them  how  they  might  know  whether  he  were  right 
in  this  pretension,  viz.  by  a  willingness  to  obey  God.  "  If  any 
man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know  of  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be 
of  God,"  as  I  say ;  "  or  whether  I  speak  of  myself,"  as  you 
imagine. 

And  doubtless  what  our  Lord  said  on  this  head  to  the  Jews, 
is  equally  true  concerning  us  or  any  other  men  in  these  days.  If 
any  man  be  willing  to  do  the  will  of  God,  if  he  be  sincerely  dis- 
posed to  obedience,  or  to  piety  toward  God  and  to  true  virtue 
toward  men,  he  shall  know  whether  the  gospel  be  a  revelation 
from  God,  or  a  mere  human  invention  ;  and  no  man  will  be  an 

*  Originally  published  in  the  4th  Vol.  of  the  American  Preacher,  1793. 


162  DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE 

infidel,  unless  he  be  of  a  depraved  heart.     This  is  manifestly  the 
doctrine  of  our  text ;  and  to  illustrate  it  I  purpose, 

I.  To  consider  more  particularly  the  import  of  these  words, 
"  If  any  man  will  do  his  will." 

II.  To  consider  the  evidence  of  the  consequence  thence  drawn, 
That  if  any  man  be  sincerely  disposed  to  piety  and  virtue,  he 
shall  know  whether  the  gospel  be  indeed  a  revelation  from  God. 

I.  /  am  to  consider  the  import  of  these  words,  "  If  any  man 
will  do  his  will.'' 

It  is  manifest  by  the  preceding  verse,  that  the  will  of  God  is 
intended.  The  words  immediately  preceding  are,  "  My  doctrine 
is  not  mine,  but  his  that  sent  me."  Then  follow  the  words  of 
the  text :  "  If  any  man  will  do  his  will,"  etc.  that  is,  the  will  of 
the  eternal  Father,  who  sent  Christ.  Now  to  do  his  will  is  to  be 
really  and  sincerely  obedient  to  him,  in  the  various  duties  of  pi- 
ety and  true  virtue.  I  say  sincerely  obedient ;  for  no  other  obe- 
dience than  that  which  is  sincere,  is  worthy  the  name  of  obedi- 
ence, or  is  considered  as  any  obedience  at  all  by  him  who  look- 
eth  on  the  heart,  and  thus  determines  the  actions  and  characters 
of  men  ;  and  not  as  we  do,  by  the  mere  outward  appearance  or 
verbal  profession.  That  real  and  cordial  sincerity  of  obedience 
is  here  intended,  is  evident,  not  only  by  the  very  nature  of  the  case, 
as  no  other  is  any  obedience  at  all ;  but  by  the  form  of  expression 
in  the  original :  lai^  rig  &ihj.,  If  any  man  he  tvilling  to  do  his  will. 
So  that  our  Lord  plainly  meant  a  sincere  and  willing  obedience, 
in  which  the  will  and  heart  are  engaged,  and  not  that  which  is 
external  and  visible  only. 

The  parts  of  this  obedience  are  two  ;  the  first  respecting  God, 
the  second  our  fellow  creatures.  The  first  is  piety  or  godliness, 
the  other  is  morality.  Godliness  is  compliance  with  the  first  and 
chief  command  of  the  divine  law,  "  Tiiou  shalt  love  the  Lord  thy 
God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy  strength,  and  with  all  thy 
mind  ;"  and  from  this  supreme  love  to  God,  to  attend  on  all  or- 
dinances of  his  worship.  Therefore  this  attendance  must  not  be 
rendered  reluctantly,  as  if  it  were  a  burden,  a  task  necessary  in- 
deed to  be  performed,  but  disagreeable  and  wearisome;  but  it 
must  be  rendered  ciieerfully  and  willingly,  with  satisfaction  and 
delight.  Indeed  it  will  be  rendered  in  this  manner,  if,  according 
to  the  text,  we  be  tvilling  to  do  his  will ;  or  if  we  comply  with 
the  first  and  chief  command  before  recited. 

The  other  branch  of  obedience  respects  our  fellow  creatures, 
and  includes  all  the  duties  of  morality  ;  as  benevolence,  justice, 
truth,  faithfulness  and  beneficence.  The  foundation  of  all  these 
duties  is  that  cordial  love  or  benevolence  required  in  the  follow- 


OF  INFIDELITY.  163 

ing  divine  command,  "  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself ;" 
which  our  Lord  tells  us  is  the  second,  and  like  unto  the  first.  All 
the  forementioned  duties  of  morality  must  be  performed  from  the 
same  willing  mind,  as  the  duties  of  piety.  It  is  by  no  means 
enough,  that  they  are  performed  externally  from  the  motives  of 
fear  of  human  laws,  judgments,  and  executions  ;  or  of  shame, 
and  regard  to  our  reputation.  They  may  be  thus  performed,  and 
yet  by  no  means  be  performed  willingly,  as  our  text  requires ; 
but  with  great  reluctance,  with  no  pleasure  in  the  duties  them- 
selves, but  with  real  disgust  at  them.  Then  only  shall  we  per- 
form them  willingly,  when  we  perform  them  from  that  love  to 
our  neighbor,  which  is  correspondent  to  the  love  which  we  bear 
to  ourselves.  Then  only  shall  we  have  a  taste  or  rehsh  for  those 
virtues,  or  for  the  real  beauty  of  them. 

Thus  we  see  w^hat  it  is  to  be  willing  to  do  the  will  of  God.  It 
is  to  have  a  heart  to  the  practice  of  sincere  piety  and  true  virtue  ; 
or  in  other  words,  to  love  God  supremely,  and  mankind  sincerely, 
or  with  direct  and  proper  benevolence. 

11.  I  proceed  to  show,  that  he  who  is  of  this  character^  shall 
know  whether  the  gospel  he  indeed  a  revelation  from  God. 

This  I  conceive  to  be  evident  by  both  scripture  and  reason. 

1.  By  scripture.  Our  text  seems  to  be  very  clear  and  perti- 
nent to  the  present  purpose.  The  question  between  our  Savior 
and  the  Jevv's  was,  whether  he  were  a  teacher  sent  from  God. 
He  affirmed  it ;  they  denied  it.  And  in  the  text  he  asserts,  that 
if  they  had  a  heart  to  obey  God,  they  would  know  whether  his 
pretension  were  well  founded,  or  whether  his  doctrine,  which  is 
the  gospel,  were  really  from  God.  This  text  alone,  therefore,  if 
there  were  no  other  text  in  the  bible  in  favor  of  our  doctrine,  is  a 
full  proof  of  the  truth  of  it.  One  divine  assertion  of  any  doc- 
trine is  a  sufficient  proof.  If  one  be  not  sufficient,  neither  is  any 
greater  number. 

But  this  is  by  no  means  the  only  text  which  supports  this  doc- 
trine. The  general  current  of  scripture  implies,  and  many  par- 
ticular texts  expressly  assert,  that  the  .blindness,  darkness  and  un- 
belief of  mankind  are  wholly  of  the  moral  kind,  voluntary,  and 
the  result  of  depravity  of  heart.  I  shall  mention  some  of  them. 
John  5:  40,  "  Ye  will  not  come  unto  me,  that  ye  might  have  life." 
Ye  will  not ;  the  original  is  more  explicit  and  determinate,  ov 
■di'litf,  ye  are  not  icilling  to  come  to  me.  But  this  unwilling- 
ness is  assigned  by  our  Lord  as  the  reason  of  the  unbelief  of  the 
Jews.  And  are  we  not  to  believe  that  unbelief  in  modern  times 
proceeds  from  the  same  cause  from  which  it  proceeded  an- 
ciently ?   2  Thess.  2:  10,  "  Them  that  perish,  because  they  re- 


164  DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE 

ceived  not  the  love  of  the  truth,  tliat  they  might  be  saved."  In 
other  passages  the  scripture  abundantly  teaches  that  they  "  who 
beheve  not,  shall  perish,  shall  be  damned,  are  condemned  al- 
ready," etc.  And  this  text  assigns  the  reason  why  they  perish  ; 
viz.  that  they  have  not  the  love  of  the  truth.  But  all  who  are 
cordially  disposed  to  piety  and  virtue,  or  to  real  obedience  to  the 
will  of  God,  do  love  the  truth.  Therefore  they  will  not  perish, 
but  will  believe  the  gospel  and  be  saved.  Again,  ver.  12,  "  That 
they  might  be  damned,  who  believed  not  the  truth,  but  had  pleas- 
ure in  unrighteousness."  This  text  shows,  that  no  man  will  be 
damned,  unless  he  have  "  pleasure  in  unrighteousness."  But  all 
unbelievers  will  be  damned.  The  consequence  is  plain,  that  all 
unbelievers  have  pleasure  in  unrighteousness.  The  reason  why 
the  heathen  world  were  given  over  to  a  reprobate  mind,  was,  that 
"  they  did  not  like  to  retain  God  in  their  knowledge."  And 
alienation  is  the  only  assignable  reason,  that  "  when  they  knew 
God,  they  glorified  him  not  as  God ;  but  became  vain  in  their 
imaginations,  and  their  foolish  heart  was  darkened."  The  apos- 
tle Peter  assigns  the  same  thing,  as  the  reason  of  the  unbelief  of 
the  scoffers,  who  should  come  in  the  last  days,  and  should  disbe- 
lieve the  second  coming  of  Christ,  "  saying,  Where  is  the  promise 
of  his  coming  ?"  The  reason  which  he  assigns,  is,  a  willing  ig- 
norance of  the  agency  of  God  in  creation  and  providence.  But 
to  be  willingly  ignorant  of  the  most  remarkable  works  of  God,  in 
which  he  has  most  remarkably  exhibited  himself  and  his  infinitely 
glorious  perfections,  argues  a  spirit  of  impiety.  "  Now  we  have 
received,  not  the  spirit  of  the  world,  but  the  spirit  which  is  of 
God  ;  that  we  might  know  the  things  that  are  freely  given  us  of 
God."  This  text  implies,  that  if  we  be  under  the  government  of 
a  worldly  spirit,  we  cannot  know  the  gospel,  and  the  truths  it  con- 
tains, and  therefore  cannot  truly  believe  them.  "  The  secret  of 
the  Lord  is  with  them  that  fear  him."  If  therefore  any  have  not 
the  secret  of  the  Lord,  as  no  infidel  has,  it  must  be  because  he 
does  not  fear  God.  1  John  2:  20,  "  Ye  have  an  unction  from  the 
Holy  One  and  know  all  things.  But  the  anointing  whicli  ye  have 
received,  abideth  in  you  ;  and  ye  need  not  that  any  man  teach 
you  ;  but  as  the  same  anointing  teacheth  you  of  all  things,  and  is 
truth,  and  is  no  lie ;  and  even  as  it  hath  taught  you,  ye  shall 
abide  in  him."  It  is  manifest,  that  this  anointing  or  unction 
means  some  kind  of  instruction  or  teaching.  But  it  cannot  mean 
common  instruction  in  doctrinal  knowledge  ;  because  it  is  said 
that  the  former  abides  in  those  to  whom  it  is  given,  and  that  they 
need  not  any  further  instruction,  and  that  they  who  enjoy  the  in- 
struction which  is  by  this  anointing,   shall  abide  in  Christ.      But 


or   INFIDELITY.  165 

none  of  these  things  can  be  truly  said  concerning  mere  common 
doctrinal  instruction  ;  nor  concerning  the  miraculous  teaching  of 
inspiration,  which  was  enjoyed  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  Judas 
was  thus  taught ;  yet  he  needed  further  teaching,  and  he  did  not 
abide  in  Christ.  Tliis  anointing  therefore  must  mean  that  teach- 
ing, which  is  by  the  sanctifying  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
They  who  have  this  teaching,  know  all  things,  therefore  they 
will  know  whether  the  gospel  be  a  divine  revelation.  And  if  any 
man  know  not  this,  it  must  be  through  the  want  of  sanctification, 
or  an  obedient  heart.  "  If  ye  continue  in  my  word — ye  shall 
know  the  truth."  These  words  are  of  the  same  import  with  our 
text,  and  very  similar  in  the  form  of  expression.  To  continue  in 
Christ's  word,  is  to  be  obedient  to  him  ;  and  those  who  are  so 
shall  know  the  truth  ;  of  course  they  will  know  whether  the  gos- 
pel be  true.  "  Ye  believe  not,  because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep." 
To  be  the  sheep  of  Christ  is  to  be  obedient  to  his  laws  and  com- 
mandments, as  the  flock  is  governed  by  the  shepherd.  And  the 
reason  why  the  Jews  believed  not  the  gospel,  was,  that  they  were 
not  obedient  to  his  laws.  "  The  fear  of  the  Lord  is  the  begin- 
ning of  wisdom  ;  a  good  understanding  have  all  they  that  do  his 
commandments."  Wisdom,  as  the  word  is  here  used,  always  im- 
plies a  belief  of  the  scriptures.  The  same  is  observable  of  good 
understanding.  Those  who  reject  the  scriptures  or  the  gospel, 
are  so  far  from  being  ever  in  scripture  represented  to  be  pos- 
sessed of  wisdom,  or  a  good  understanding,  that  they  are  every- 
where called  fools,  and  are  said  to  be  blind,  darkened,  knowing 
nothing  as  they  ought.  All  those  therefore  who  possess  wisdom 
or  a  good  understanding,  believe  the  scriptures.  The  source  of 
this  wisdom  and  belief  is  the  fear  of  the  Lord  ;  and  the  source  of 
infidelity  must  be  the  want  of  that  fear.  But  that  fear  involves  a 
spirit  of  true  piety  and  virtue,  and  without  it  there  can  be  no  true 
piety  or  virtue.  "  Having  the  understanding  darkened,  being 
alienated  from  the  life  of  God  through  the  ignorance  that  is  in 
them,  because  of  the  blindness  [Uoj^oniv,  or  as  it  is  rendered  in 
the  margin  hardness,  and  might  be  more  strictly  rendered  callous- 
ness,] of  their  heart."  The  ignorance  and  unbelief  therefore  of 
mankind  with  respect  to  divine  subjects  are  because  of  the  hard- 
ness or  depravity  of  their  hearts.  "  If  our  gospel  be  hid,  it  is  hid 
to  them  that  are  lost ;  in  whom  the  god  of  this  world  hath  blinded 
the  minds  of  them  which  believe  not,  lest  the  light  of  the  glorious 
gospel  of  Christ,  who  is  the  image  of  God  should  shine  unto  them." 
Who  the  god  of  this  world  is,  is  manifest  from  John  12:  31,  "  Now 
is  the  judgment  of  this  world  ;  now  is  the  prince  of  this  world 
cast  out;"  and  14:  30,  "  The  prince  of  this  world  cometh,  and 
VoL.IL  15 


166  DEPRAVITV  THE   SOURCE 

hath  nothing  in  me.  Against  the  rulers  of  the  darkness  of  this 
world."  The  god  of  this  world  then  is  Satan,  the  great  enemy 
of  mankind ;  and  all  to  whom  the  gospel  is  hid,  and  all  who 
believe  it  not,  are.  under  the  influence  of  the  god  of  this  world, 
blinding  their  minds  ;  and  this  blinding  influence  is  the  cause 
why  they  see  not  the  light  of  the  glorious  gospel  and  believe  it  not. 
But  this  malicious  being  can  have  no  such  blinding  influence  on 
any  man,  only  so  far  as  he  is  depraved,  and  is  under  the  influ- 
ence of  his  depravity.  Therefore  the  whole  of  that  blindness, 
which  induces  or  implies  infidelity,  is  built  on  the  foundation  of 
depravity  of  heart.  "  And  this  is  the  condemnation,  that  light  is 
come  into  the  world,  and  men  have  loved  darkness  rather  than 
light,  because  their  deeds  were  evil."  The  light  here  intended 
is  the  light  of  the  gospel ;  and  the  reason  here  given,  why  men 
did  not  love  and  receive  this  light,  is,  that  their  deeds  were  evil. 
"  Wherefore  it  is  contained  in  the  scripture.  Behold  I  lay  in  Zion 
a  chief  corner-stone,  elect,  precious  ;  and  he  that  believeth  on 
him  shall  not  be  confounded.  Unto  you  therefore  which  believe, 
he  is  precious  ;  but  unto  them  which  be  disobedient,  the  stone 
which  the  builders  disallowed  the  same  is  made  the  head  of  the 
corner,  and  a  stone  of  stumbling,  and  a  rock  of  offence,  even  to 
them  which  stumble  at  the  word,  being  disobedient."  Nothing  is 
more  evident,  than,  that  disobedience  is  here  represented  to  be 
the  cause  of  stumbling  at  the  word.  1  John  4:  6,  "  He  that 
knoweth  God  heareth  us  ;  he  that  is  not  of  God,  heareth  not  us." 
Hearing  the  apostles  implies  a  belief  of  them.  Therefore  this 
text  asserts,  that  he  that  knoweth  God,  believeth  the  apostolic 
doctrine  ;  and  that  he  that  knoweth  not  God,  and  adhereth  not 
to  his  cause,  believeth  not  that  doctrine ;  and  the  former  is  given 
as  the  reason  of  the  latter. 

Thus  we  see  how  clearly  and  abundantly  the  scriptures  teach, 
that  infidelity  is  the  eflfect  of  a  depraved  heart  and  life,  and  that 
a  spirit  of  real  piety  and  virtue  will  forever  prevent  or  abolish  it. 
But 

2.  I  am  to  consider  how  far  the  voice  of  I'eason  coincides  with 
the  voice  of  scripture.  If  the  gospel  be  a  revelation  from  God, 
there  is  doubtless  evidence  of  it.  It  would  be  absurd  to  imagine 
that  God  has  taken  care  to  give  a  revelation  of  his  will  to  man- 
kind, and  yet  has  not  taken  care  that  there  should  be  evidence 
sufficient  to  satisfy  the  rational,  the  attentive  and  candid,  that  it 
is  indeed  a  revelation.  A  revelation  so  circumstanced  could  an- 
swer no  purpose  of  a  revelation,  nor  could  it  be  reasonably  ex- 
pected that  it  should  be  received  and  regarded,  at  all,  as  a  reve- 
lation.    Nay,  in  fact  it  would  be  no  revelation  from  God  to  man- 


OF   INFIDELITY.  167 

kind,  because  it  would  exhibit  nothing  as  conning  from  God.  If 
a  kind  prince  should  make  known  his  will  to  his  subjects,  but  in 
such  a  manner  that  there  should  be  no  credible  evidence  that  it 
was  his  will,  as  they  could  not  in  this  case  know  that  it  was  his 
will,  so  they  would  be  just  as  ignorant  of  what  his  will  really  was, 
as  they  were  before,  or  as  if  the  exhibition  supposed  had  come 
from  another  prince,  or  from  any  other  person.  If  therefore  the 
gospel  be  from  God,  and  were  designed  to  be  received  as  such, 
there  is  undoubtedly  evidence  that  it  is  from  God  ;  such  evi- 
dence as  a  rational,  attentive  and  candid  inquirer  will  see  ;  and 
all  who  have  a  spirit  of  piety  and  true  virtue  will  be  candid  and 
attentive  to  divine  truth,  and  to  everything  which  with  any  prob- 
ability or  plausibility  claims  to  be  divine  truth  ;  and  their  can- 
dor and  attention  will  be  proportioned  to  their  piety  and  virtue. 
All  such  therefore  will  see  tiie  real  evidence  that  the  gospel  is 
from  God  and  will  receive  it  accordingly.  And  if  any  see  not 
that  evidence,  it  must  be  owing  to  the  want  of  candor  and  at- 
tention, and  therefore  to  the  want  of  piety  and  virtue. 
,  If  it  should  be  said,  a  man  may  be  induced  by  prepossession 
of  education,  by  enthusiasm  or  blind  zeal,  to  receive  a  false  sys- 
tem for  truth,  contrary  to  evidence,  or  at  least  without  evidence  ; 
and  that  in  this  case  he  is  not  governed  by  a  peverse  bias : — 

I  answer,  nothing  but  some  perverse  bias,  some  party  attach- 
ment, some  criminal  indolence  or  prepossession,  can  make  a  man 
so  enthusiastic,  so  full  of  groundless  zeal  and  so  attached  to  the 
ways  and  habits  of  his  education,  as  to  be  blinded  to  real  evi- 
dence exhibited,  or  to  imagine  that  he  sees  evidence  which  has 
no  existence.  Whence  arises  enthusiasm  ?  Not  surely  from  a 
principle  of  true  virtue  and  piety.  There  will  be  perfect  piety 
and  virtue  in  heaven,  but  no  enthusiasm,  no  visionaries.  And 
doubtless  if  a  man  were  completely  sanctified  in  this  world,  it 
would  preserve  or  deliver  him  from  all  enthusiasm.  If  so,  then 
enthusiasm  will,  other  things  being  the  same,  be  diminished  in 
any  man  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of  his  virtue  and  piety.  If 
honesty,  virtue  and  piety  would  not  preserve  all  men  of  common 
capacities  from  enthusiasm,  then  God  has  laid  some  men  of  com- 
mon capacities  under  a  necessity  which  depends  not  on  their 
wills,  but  is  a  natural,  evincible  necessity,  of  rejecting  true  reli- 
gion, and  embracing  enthusiasm.  And  then  these  consequences 
will  follow  ;  that  they  are  under  no  obligation  to  be  truly  reli- 
gious ;  that  enthusiasm  or  false  religion  in  them  is  no  sin  or 
fault ;  that  true  religion,  as  opposed  to  enthusiasm,  is  as  to  them 
no  duty  ;  and  that  enthusiasm  in  them  is  as  true  and  genuine  re- 
ligion as  any,  and  consequently  is  not  enthusiasm.     On  the  whole 


168  DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE 

therefore,  we  are  obliged  to  come  to  this  conchision,  that  all  reli- 
gious enthusiasm,  and  all  visionary  schemes  of  religion,  do  and 
must  arise  from  depravity. 

Thus,  the  truth  of  our  doctrine,  that  if  any  man  be  possessed 
of  a  proper  spirit  of  piety  and  true  virtue,  he  shall  know  whether 
the  gospel  be  a  revelation  from  God,  or  a  mere  human  invention, 
appears  not  only  to  be  confirmed  by  scripture,  but  necessarily  to 
follow  from  the  plainest  dictates  of  reason  and  common  sense. 

If  this  doctrine  be  true,  and  if  the  gospel  be  a  revelation  from 
God,  or  a  system  of  truth,  all  who  believe  it  not  are  blinded  by 
some  perverse  bias,  or  by  a  depraved  heart,  and  they  are  not  wil- 
ling to  do  the  will  of  God.  No  other  reason  can  be  assigned  for 
their  unbelief.  They  may  be  challenged  to  assign  any  other. 
On  the  other  hand,  if  the  gospel  be  not  a  revelation  from  God, 
as  there  neither  is  nor  can  be  evidence,  that  it  is  from  him  ;  all 
who  believe  it  as  from  him,  are  therein  actuated  by  some  per- 
verse bias,  or  by  an  unwillingness  to  do  the  will  of  God.  On 
this  supposition  all  who  have  ever  believed  the  gospel,  the  prim- 
itive Christians,  the  apostles,  even  Paul  himself,  who  suffered  the 
loss  of  all  things  that  he  might  win  Christ,  either  did  not  at  all 
believe  the  gospel,  and  were  the  vilest  impostors,  or  they  be- 
lieved the  gospel  from  a  spirit  of  disobedience  to  the  divine  will. 
Nay,  the  same  is  true  of  Jesus  Christ  himself.  Either  therefore 
Paul,  Peter  and  John,  nay,  Jesus  himself,  if  they  were  not  design- 
ing impostors,  believed  as  they  did  from  a  spirit  of  disobedience  to 
the  divine  will  ;  or  from  the  same  spirit  Shaftesbury,  Bolingbroke 
and  Hume  believed  as  they  did.  There  is  no  medium  in  this 
case.  And  who,  it  is  most  likely,  were  influenced  by  a  spirit  of 
disobedience  and  impiety,  let  every  one  judge,  who  is  acquainted 
with  their  respective  writings.  Let  every  such  person  judge, 
whether  a  spirit  of  obedience,  or  of  piety  and  virtue,  breathes  most 
in  tiie  writings  of  Paul,  Peter  and  John,  and  in  the  discourses  of 
Jesus  Christ ;  or  in  the  writings  of  Shaftesbury,  Bolingbroke  and 
Hume.  The  first  of  these  last  mentioned  authors  holds,  that 
ridicule  is  the  test  of  truth.  He  ironically  declares,  "  that  when 
the  supreme  civil  powers  have  given  their  sanction  to  a  religious 
record  or  pious  writ,  it  becomes  immoral  and  profane  in  any  one 
to  deny  or  dispute  the  divine  authority  of  the  least  line  or  sylla- 
ble contained  in  it ;"  and  represents  the  scripture  doctrine  of  re- 
wards and  punishments  as  mean,  selfish,  mercenary,  and  hurtful 
to  the  interest  of  virtue.  He  applies  his  own  avowed  test  of 
truth  to  the  scripture,  and  endeavors  to  ridicule  the  spirit  of  pro- 
phecy ;  and  explicitly  accuses  our  Savior  of  being  actuated  by 
ambition  and  a  persecuting  spirit.     He  places  the  obligation  to 


OF   INFIDELITY.  169 

virtue  in  its  conduciveness  to  our  present  happiness ;  and  seems 
to  erect  such  a  scheme  of  virtue  as  is  independent  of  religion  and 
destitute  of  proper  regard  to  God.  Bolingbroke  denies  a  provi- 
dence extending  to  individuals  ;  holds  that  modesty  and  chastity 
have  no  foundation  in  nature,  and  are  owing  to  human  vanity  ; 
that  man  is  no  more  than  a  superior  animal,  whose  views  are 
confined  to  this  present  life,  and  who  has  no  reasonable  prospect 
of  existing  in  a  future  state  ;  who  is  not  accountable,  and  has  no 
moral  sense  or  feeling  naturally  implanted  in  him  ;  and  whose 
supreme  end  is  his  own  pleasure  in  this  life,  etc.  The  other 
writer,  Hume,  denies  that  we  can  argue  the  existence  of  an  in- 
telligent cause  of  all  things  from  the  existence  of  the  world  ;  de- 
nies that  we  have  any  evidence  of  moral  perfection  in  God,  any 
evidence  of  a  providence,  or  of  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  pun- 
ishment ;  reckons  mortification,  self-denial  and  humility  among 
the  monkish  virtues,  and  pride  among  the  real  virtues  ;  denies 
the  distinction  between  natural  endowments  or  talents,  whether 
mental  or  corporeal,  and  moral  virtues  ;  and  holds  that  mental 
capacity,  strength  of  memory,  wit,  cleanliness  and  bodily  strength 
are  as  real  virtues  as  justice,  chastity  and  benevolence.  Now,  I 
say  let  any  man  of  tolerable  understanding  and  candor  judge, 
whether  those  who  embraced  and  taught  such  theological  and 
moral  principles  as  these,  were  most  likely  to  have  been  blinded 
to  truth  by  a  spirit  of  impiety  and  disobedience  ;  or  he  who  de- 
livered the  Sermon  on  the  Mount,  and  those  who  wrote  the  Gos- 
pels, and  other  books  of  the  New  Testament. 

I  have  now  finished  what  was  proposed  from  our  text,  and 
therefore  shall  close  the  discourse  with  some  inferences. 

1.  Our  subject  teaches  us,  that  if  the  gospel  be  true,  there  is 
no  necessity  that  any  man  be  an  infidel.  Infidelity  is  not  neces- 
sary, but  voluntary.  Men  are  infidels,  because  they  are  willingly 
ignorant  of  the  truth,  and  shut  their  eyes  against  it.  Doubtless 
all  depravity  of  heart  is  voluntary  ;  and  that,  on  the  supposition 
that  the  gospel  is  true,  is  the  real  cause  of  all  infidelity.  This  is 
indeed  a  doctrine  grating  to  the  pride  of  unbelievers  ;  yet  it  is  the 
doctrine  of  scripture,  and  the  doctrine  of  reason  too  ;  nor,  as  has 
been  asserted,  can  they  themselves  support  any  other  theory  with 
respect  to  this  subject.  They  can,  on  the  supposition  now  made, 
give  no  other  account  of  their  unbelief,  which  will  bear  examina- 
tion. In  vain  will  any  of  them  pretend  to  be  acted  upon  me- 
chanically in  this  case  ;  that  what  they  see,  they  see,  and  cannot 
but  see ;  and  what  they  do  not  see,  they  cannot  see,  and  there- 
fore are  not  to  be  blamed  ;  that  men  can  no  more  think  alike, 
than  they  can  look  alike.     The  truth  is,  that  what  they  do  not 

15* 


170  DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE 

see,  as  to  this  subject,  they  might  and  would  see,  were  it  not  for 
the  depravity  of  their  hearts  ;  and  therefore  for  that  blindness  they 
are  most  justly  to  be  blamed  and  condemned. 

2.  This  subject  teaches  us,  not  only  that  no  man  is  under  a  ne- 
cessity to  disbelieve  Christianity,  but  that  no  man  is  under  a  ne- 
cessity to  be  in  doubt  or  uncertainty  whether  Christianity  be  true 
or  false.  There  is  a  plain  and  sure  way  to  the  solution  of  all 
such  doubts,  and  every  man  may  in  that  way  obtain  a  full  satis- 
faction concerning  the  truth.  If  Christianity  be  true,  he  may  ob- 
tain full  evidence  of  it ;  if  it  be  false,  he  may  obtain  full  evidence 
of  that.  All  that  is  necessary  to  this,  is,  that  he  be  willing  to  do 
the  will  of  God.  Therefore  to  be  in  a  state  of  uncertainty  in 
this  case,  to  halt  between  two  opinions,  is  utterly  inexcusable  ; 
equally  so  as  disobedience  itself. 

Yet  is  not  this  the  case  with  many  ?  They  profess  to  be  in- 
quiring whether  Christianity  be  true  or  not.  They  are  not  satis- 
fied ;  they  want  further  time  to  weigh  the  evidence,  the  argu- 
ments in  favor  of  Christianity  and  the  objections  against  it.  But 
though  such  men  may  flatter  themselves  that  they  are  acting  a 
very  rational  and  commendable  part ;  the  truth  is,  that  they  be- 
tray the  wickedness  of  their  hearts,  and  their  unwillingness  to  do 
the  will  of  God.  For,  as  on  the  supposition  that  Christianity  is 
true,  they  who  positively  disbelieve  its  truth,  hereby  prove  that 
they  are  under  the  influence  of  a  disobedient  spirit ;  so  in  the 
case  which  is  now  before  us,  they  who  are  unsettled  and  halt  be- 
tween the  truth  and  falsehood  of  Christianity,  prove  that  they  are 
under  the  influence  of  the  same  spirit.  Were  they  disposed  to 
obedience,  they  would  soon  come  to  a  determination,  and  see  the 
evidence  which  exists,  either  that  Christianity  is  true,  or  that  it  is 
false. 

3.  Hence  we  see  the  reason  why  unbelief  is  every  where  in 
scripture  represented  as  a  sin,  and  is  threatened  with  severe  pun- 
ishment ;  as  it  is  in  such  passages  as  these  :  "  He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved  ;  but  he  that  believeth  not,  shall 
be  damned.  He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not  condemned :  but 
he  that  believeth  not,  is  condemned  already ;  because  he  hath 
not  believed  on  the  name  of  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God.  This 
is  the  work  of  God,  that  ye  believe  on  him,  whom  he  hath  sent. 
This  is  his  commandment  that  we  should  believe  on  the  name  of 
his  Son  Jesus  Christ."  So  in  numberless  other  texts.  Now  it 
hath  been  made  an  objection  to  Christianity,  that  it  requires  man- 
kind to  believe  it ;  that  it  constantly  exhorts  to  faith  as  a  duty, 
and  dissuades  from  unbelief  as  a  sin,  and  condemns  it  to  the  se- 
verest punishment.     It  hath  been  pleaded,  that  this  is  absurd  ; 


OP  INFIDELITY.  171 

equally  so  as  to  condemn  and  punish  a  man  for  not  seeing  the 
light  of  the  sun  ;  or  as  to  exhort  him  to  believe  a  theorem  in  geom- 
etry. But  this  is  a  gross  misrepresentation,  unless  it  be  supposed 
that  the  man  sees  not  the  light  of  the  sun  and  the  truth  of  the 
geometrical  theorem,  because  he  voluntarily  shuts  or  blinds  his 
eyes  against  the  former,  and  will  not  properly  attend  to  the  lat- 
ter. The  condemnation  of  sinners  is,  "  that  light  is  come  into 
the  world,  and  they  love  darkness  rather  than  light ;"  and  that 
"because  their  deeds  are  evil."  Surely  as  a  disobedient  spirit 
is  sin,  and  as  such  to  be  warned  against;  so  is  that  unbelief 
which  is  the  result  of  it.  As  an  obedient  spirit  is  a  duty,  and  as 
such  is  with  good  reason  to  be  inculcated  ;  so  is  that  faith  which 
depends  on  it.  As  an  unwillingness  to  do  the  will  of  God  de- 
serves punishment,  if  anything  doth  ;  so  does  that  unbelief  which 
is  the  efTect  of  it.  These  observations  are  equally  true,  whether 
by  faith  we  mean  a  belief  of  Christianity,  in  opposition  to  deism  ; 
or  that  cordial  receiving  of  Christ,  to  which  the  promise  of  salva- 
tion is  made. 

4.  Hence  also  we  learn  the  true  source  of  all  disputes  concern- 
ing any  of  the  essential  doctrines  of  Christianity.  It  must  be 
some  depraved  principle.  The  same  reasoning  holds  good  here, 
as  with  regard  to  Christianity  itself.  We  can  no  more  suppose 
that  God  would  leave  the  essential  doctrines  of  a  revelation  with- 
out evidence  that  they  are  really  doctrines  of  truth,  than  that  he 
would  leave  the  revelation  in  general  without  such  evidence. 
And  if  there  be  such  evidence,  not  to  see  it  must  proceed  from 
some  depraved  principle.  No  other  cause  of  unbelief  in  this  case 
can  be  assigned.  I  know  it  hath  often  been  said  to  be  owing  to 
different  modes  of  education,  different  instruction,  associations  of 
ideas  and  habits  of  thinking,  etc.  that  some  christians  do  not  be- 
lieve all  the  essential  doctrines  of  Christianity.  But  if  any  or  all 
these  causes  influence  them  to  reject  any  essential  doctrine  of 
Christianity,  of  the  truth  of  which  there  is  real  and  sufficient  evi- 
dence, they  must  still  produce  this  effect  by  rendering  them  un- 
candid  and  inattentive  to  the  evidence  ;  and  this  want  of  candor 
and  attention  is  depravity.  If  therefore  we  be  duly  attentive  and 
candid,  we  shall  see  this  evidence  ;  shall  be  established  in  the  be- 
lief of  the  doctrines,  and  shall  surmount  our  doubts.  If  our  hearts 
be  not  established  by  faith,  but  are  driven  about  with  every  "  wind 
of  doctrine,  and  craftiness  of  men  whereby  they  lie  in  wait  to  de- 
ceive," it  must  be  owing  to  some  want  of  attention  or  want  of 
candor,  or,  in  the  language  of  the  text,  to  unwillingness  to  do  the 
will  of  God.  And  if  all  professed  Christians  were  free  from  all 
depravity  of  heart,  they  would  be  agreed  in  all  the  essentials  of 
Christianity. 


172  DEPRAVITY  THE  SOURCE  OF  INFIDELITY. 

5.  Let  us  adore  the  goodness  of  God,  that  he  hath  put  the  evi- 
dence of  Christianity  and  of  the  essential  doctrines  of  it  thus  with- 
in the  reach  of  every  good  man.  This  evidence  is  within  the 
reach  not  only  of  the  learned,  but  of  the  unlearned ;  not  only  of 
the  wise  and  great  men  of  this  world,  but  of  all  who  are  willing 
to  do  the  will  of  God.  Therefore  we  have  not  to  inquire,  who 
shall  ascend  into  heaven  or  descend  into  the  deep,  to  bring  us 
evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel.  But  the  evidence  is  nigh  us, 
and  will  be  received  by  all,  if  it  be  not  shut  out  by  the  depravity 
of  their  hearts.  For  "  if  any  man  will  do  his  will,  he  shall  know 
of  the  doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God,"  or  whether  it  be  a  mere 
human  invention. 


SERMON   X. 


GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP.* 

Psalm  46:  1. — God  is  our  refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present  help  in  trouble. 

Man  is  always  dependent  and  therefore  always  wants  help  and 
strength.  But  he  especially  wants  these  in  a  time  of  trouble.  A 
time  of  trouble  is  often,  if  not  always  a  time  of  danger ;  and  in 
danger  we  want  a  refuge,  a  place  to  which  we  may  flee  and  be 
safe.  Even  in  prosperity  we  are  dependent,  and  want  help, 
strength  and  refuge ;  but  at  such  a  time  we  are  not  apt  to  be  so 
sensible  of  our  wants.  In  trouble  a  sense  of  them  is  wont  to  be 
lively  and  strong,  and  to  carry  full  conviction  to  the  mind.  Now 
our  text  informs  us  where  we  may  obtain  that  strength  and  help, 
and  where  we  may  find  that  refuge,  which  is  so  necessary  in 
trouble.  "  God  is  our  refuge  and  strength,  a  very  present  help 
in  trouble." 

As  our  text  plainly  implies,  that  we  are  liable  to  trouble,  there- 
fore I  shall 

I.  Mention  some  of  the  troubles  to  which  we  are  most  liable. 

II.  Consider  in  what  respects  God  is  our  refuge  and  strength. 

III.  Show  that  he  is  a  very  present  help  in  trouble. 

I.  /  am  to  mention  some  of  the  troubles  to  which  mankind 
are  most  liable. 

These  are  of  several  kinds. 

1.  We  are  liable  to  personal  troubles,  such  as  pain,  sickness 
and  death.  "  By  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death 
by  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have  sin- 
ned." And  with  death  came  all  that  train  of  evils  which  attend 
it  and  lead  to  it.  We  are  liable  to  disappointments  in  our  ex- 
pectations ;  to  disappointments  in  business  ;  to  losses  of  proper- 
ty ;  and  to  poverty  with  all  its  attendant  evils.  There  is  no  de- 
pendence on  any  possessions  in  life.  The  most  affluent  often  lose 
their  property,  and  are  reduced  to  the  greatest  want.     We  are 

*  Preached  at  the  funeral  of  the  Hon,  Roger  Sherman,  senator  of  the 
United  States  of  America,  who  died  the  23d  of  July,  1793.  Published  at 
New  Haven. 


174  GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP. 

liable  to  the  loss  of  our  reputation,  and  this  not  only  in  conse- 
quence of  ill  conduct,  but  by  the  mere  malice  of  others.  Even  the 
holy  apostles  and  primitive  christians  could  not  be  safe  from  the 
reproaches  of  their  enemies.  1  Cor.  4:  12,  13,  "  Being  reviled, 
we  bless  ;  being  persecuted,  we  sutler  it ;  being  defamed,  we  en- 
treat ;  we  are  made  as  the  filth  of  the  world,  and  are  the  offscour- 
ing  of  all  things  unto  this  day." 

2.  We  are  liable  to  bereavement  of  our  friends  and  relatives. 
Our  happiness  in  this  world  often  very  much  depends  on  them. 
When  they  are  taken  away,  we  of  course  lose  all  that  happiness 
which  we  derived  from  them.  Besides,  the  loss  of  them  is  gen- 
erally attended  with  a  positive  affliction  which  is  peculiar  and 
pungent.  To  separate  some  of  the  nearest  connections  of  life  is 
like  separating  soul  and  body,  or  tearing  man  from  himself.  Yet 
there  is  no  discharge  in  this  war. 

3.  We  are  liable  to  public  calamities,  such  as  drought,  famine, 
wars,  internal  broils  and  commotions.  Some  of  those  calamities 
are  severely  felt  at  this  very  time,  by  several  of  the  nations  of  the 
world.  But  happy  are  we  that  we  are  free  from  them.  Another 
public  calamity  to  which  we  and  all  men  are  liable,  is  the  loss  of 
wise  and  faithful  magistrates.  And  this  is  a  very  great  calamity. 
A  faithful  man,  who  can  find  1  When  we  have  found  him 
and  found  him  in  the  office  of  a  principal  magistrate,  we  ought 
highly  to  prize  him,  and  when  he  is  taken  from  us,  to  consider 
it  as  a  great  frown  of  divine  providence. 

4.  We  are  liable  to  spiritual  troubles,  as  well  as  temporal. 
As  sinners,  we  are  already  the  subjects  of  that  which  is  the  source 
of  all  other  evils.  And  in  consequence  of  sin  and  depravity  in 
general  we  are  liable  to  various  temptations,  temptations  from 
our  own  corruptions,  temptations  from  the  world  and  from  our 
grand  adversary.  We  are  liable  to  spiritual  desertions,  to  the 
hiding  of  the  light  of  God's  countenance,  to  the  just  withholding 
of  such  measures  of  divine  grace  as  we  need  for  our  christian  com- 
fort and  edification  ;  nay,  to  the  accusations  of  a  guilty  con- 
science, to  fear  of  divine  wrath,  to  spiritual  darkness  and  even  to 
despondency.  Also  we  are  liable  to  trouble  which  respects  the 
church  of  God  in  general.  Is  there  a  general  opposition  to  the 
cause  of  Christ  ?  a  general  persecution  ?  or  a  perversion  or  rejec- 
tion of  his  truth  more  or  less  general  ?  These  must  affect  every 
christian,  and  be  a  sore  trial  to  him.  In  proportion  as  the  cause 
of  Christianity  is  promoted  and  prospers,  every  real  christian  is 
happy  ;  in  proportion  as  it  is  opposed  and  obstructed,  it  is  a  trou- 
ble and  an  affliction  to  him. 

These  are  some  of  the  kinds  of  trouble  both  temporal  and  spi- 


GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP.  175 

ritual,  to  which  we  are  most  Hable.  In  these  we  need  a  refuge, 
we  need  strength  and  help  ;  and  our  text  directs  us  where  we 
may  find  them.     Therefore  I  am, 

II.  To  consider  in  what  respect  God  is  our  refuge  and 
strength. 

A  refuge  is  a  shelter  from  any  danger  or  distress.  A  person 
exposed  to  an  enemy  may  flee  to  a  fortress.  In  this  case  the 
fortress  is  his  refuge.  Exposed  to  a  storm  he  may  flee  to  his  house, 
and  then  he  makes  his  house  a  refuge.  Now  God  is  a  refuge  or 
a  defence  to  all  who  will  flee  to  him,  whatever  their  danger,  dis- 
tress or  trouble  be.  He  is  their  strength  too.  Those  who  are 
weak,  need  strength  ;  those  who  are  exposed,  need  a  refuge. 
But  we  are  both  weak  and  exposed.  As  creatures  we  are  weak 
originally  and  necessarily ;  and  are  rendered  much  more  weak 
by  sin  and  depravity.  Also  we  are  exposed  to  innumerable  foes, 
and  to  be  overwhelmed  by  innumerable  evils.  Therefore  we  need  a 
refuge.  But  God  offers  himself  to  us  both  as  our  strength  and 
refuge.  In  all  our  troubles  and  dangers  we  may  safely  apply  to 
him,  and  if  we  apply  sincerely,  we  shall  find  refuge  and  strength. 
He  will  protect  us  from  all  the  evil  which  is  not  for  our  good, 
and  will  overrule  that  for  our  good,  which  he  permits  to  come 
upon  us.  He  will  strengthen  us  by  his  grace  immediately  com- 
municated. Thus  he  strengthened  Paul  under  his  trials,  and  as- 
sured him  that  his  grace  was  sufficient  for  him  ;  and  through 
Christ  strengthening  him  he  could  do  all  things. 

Beside  the  immediate  influence  of  the  divine  grace  and  spirit, 
God  is  also  wont  to  strengthen  by  his  truth. 

Here  it  may  be  proper  to  inquire,  what  considerations  or  views 
of  God  and  divine  truth  have  a  happy  tendency  to  support  and 
strengthen  christians  under  the  trials  of  life. 

1.  The  consideration  that  God  reigns  universally,  and  that 
he  orders  all  their  afflictions,  happily  tends  to  support  and  strength- 
en them.  His  kingdom  ruleth  over  all  and  his  disposal  extendeth 
to  all  events  whatsoever ;  not  only  to  those  which  we  acknow- 
ledge to  be  important,  such  as  the  rise  and  fall  of  kingdoms  and 
empires,  etc. ;  but  to  those  which  we  are  apt  to  think  are  most 
unimportant  and  trifling.  For  the  former  depend  on  the  latter. 
The  selling  of  Joseph  into  Egypt,  the  consequent  preservation  of 
the  family  of  Jacob  and  the  fulfilment  of  God's  covenant  with 
Abraham,  all  depended  on  the  seemingly  trifling  occurrences  of 
a  boy's  dream,  and  of  his  father's  making  for  him  a  coat  of  divers 
colors.  And  even  the  crucifixion  of  our  Lord  and  the  redemp- 
tion of  mankind  depended  on  the  giving  of  a  sop  to  one  of  the 
disciples.     Therefore  there  is  no  foundation,  for  the  infidel  objec- 


176  GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP. 

tion  to  a  universal  providence,  that  some  events  are  too  small  and 
trifling  to  be  the  objects  of  divine  attention.  The  scriptures  as- 
sure us,  that  though  two  sparrows  are  of  such  small  value  as  to  be 
sold  for  a  farthing,  yet  not  one  of  them  falleth  to  the  ground 
without  our  heavenly  Father ;  and  that  the  very  hairs  of  our  heads 
are  all  numbered  by  him. 

Some  readily  grant  a  universal  divine  disposal  as  to  natural 
events,  but  deny  it  with  respect  to  the  free  actions  of  moral  agents, 
as  they  imagine  such  a  disposal  to  be  inconsistent  with  the  free- 
dom of  those  actions.  If  the  freedom  of  those  actions  consist  in 
contingence,  or  in  the  circumstance  that  they  are  not  caused  by  any 
thing  external  to  the  mind  ;  undoubtedly  a  disposal  of  providence 
extending  to  those  actions  would  be  inconsistent  with  their  free- 
dom. But  if  the  freedom  of  those  actions  consist  in  their  volun- 
tariness, and  if  a  man  be  free  to  anything  with  respect  to  which 
he  is  not  under  either  a  compulsion  or  restraint  to  which  his  will 
on  the  whole  is  opposed,  or  may  be  supposed  to  be  opposed  ; 
then  there  is  not  the  least  inconsistence  between  human  liberty 
and  a  universal  and  overruling  agency  of  God  in  all  events  what- 
soever. 

As  God  is  perfect,  all  his  works  must  be  perfect,  and  his  provi- 
dence is  direcjted  by  perfect  wisdom  and  goodness.  Therefore 
all  that  he  does,  or  permits  to  take  place,  is,  considered  as  a  dis- 
pensation of  providence,  perfectly  wise,  just  and  good.  The 
Judge  of  all  the  earth  will  and  must  do  right.  He  cannot  err. 
This  under  the  greatest  afflictions  is  a  most  strengthening  and 
supporting  consideration. 

2.  The  consideration  that  God  requires  submission  and  pa- 
tience under  all  afflictions  is  of  the  same  happy  tendency.  As 
was  observed  under  the  preceding  particular,  the  Judge  of  all  the 
earth  cannot  do  otherwise  than  right ;  therefore  he  requires 
nothing  which  is  not  right  and  reasonable.  This  requirement  is 
not  only  authoritative  and  in  that  view  must  be  complied  with  ;  but 
we  ought  to  comply  with  it,  in  consideration  of  the  reasonable- 
ness and  fitness  of  it ;  so  that  in  instances  of  affliction  which  are 
the  most  dark  and  mysterious,  we  may  implicitly  believe  that  sub- 
mission and  acquiescence  are  no  more  than  our  reasonable  ser- 
vice, since  God  requires  them.  This  consideration  tend ;  to 
strengthen  against  impatience  and  murmuring,  and  against  faint- 
ing in  the  day  of  adversity. 

3.  That  all  our  afflictions  will  subserve  the  divine  glory  and 
the  general  good  of  the  created  system,  is  also  supporting  and 
strengthening  to  every  pious  and  benevolent  mind.  The  declar- 
ative glory  of  God  and  the  good  of  the  created  system  mutually 


GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP.       '         177 

imply  each  other  and  are  one  and  the  same  thing.  When  good  is 
promoted  in  the  creation,  God  is  glorified  ;  and  when  God  is 
glorified,  good  is  promoted  in  the  creation.  But  the  greatest 
good  of  the  created  system  no  more  implies  the  happiness  of  every 
individual,  than  the  greatest  good  of  the  state  implies  the  happi- 
ness of  every  citizen. 

And  as  it  was  the  original  design  of  God  to  glorify  himself  and 
to  promote  the  happiness  of  the  creation,  to  the  highest  possible 
degree  ;  so  he  hath  chosen  a  plan  or  system  of  the  universe,  of  all 
others  in  the  best  possible  manner  adapted  to  these  ends.  To 
imagine  the  contrary,  would  be  an  impeachment  of  his  goodness, 
and  would  imply  that  he  was,  by  some  principle  opposed  to  good- 
ness, kept  back  from  communicating  that  good,  which  he  could 
easily  have  communicated. 

I  know  it  has  been  objected,  that  on  the  supposition,  that  God 
has  adopted  the  best  possible  system  of  the  universe,  he  hath  ex- 
hausted his  own  infinite  goodness  ;  which  it  is  said,  is  an  ab- 
surdity, because  infinite  goodness  is  by  the  terms  inexhaustible. 
But  is  infinite  goodness  any  more  inexhaustible,  than  any  attri- 
bute of  God  ?  All  his  attributes  are  equally  infinite,  as  his  good- 
ness ;  for  instance  his  truth  or  his  wisdom.  Yet  it  will  not  be 
denied,  that  he  exhausts  his  truth  in  all  his  communications  with 
his  creatures,  and  speaks  as  truly  as  it  is  possible  for  him  to 
speak  ;  or  that  he  exhausts  his  wisdom  in  all  his  conduct,  and 
acts  as  wisely  as  it  is  possible  he  should  act.  Therefore  there  is 
no  absurdity  in  supposing,  that  God  acted  as  wisely  as  it  is  pos- 
sible he  should  act,  in  choosing  this  particular  system  of  the  uni- 
verse, and  that  he  exhausted  his  infinite  wisdom  in  this,  as  well 
as  in  every  other  instance  of  his  conduct.  But  how  could  he 
have  acted  in  the  wisest  possible  manner  if  he  did  not  choose  the 
best  possible  system  ?  Does  wisdom  ever  dictate  anything  incon- 
sistent with  goodness  ?  or  are  infinite  wisdom  and  infinite  good- 
ness opposed  to  each  other  ? 

If  the  system  which  God  hath  in  fact  adopted  be  the  wisest 
and  best  possible,  doubtless  every  part  and  every  event  in  this 
system  is  in  the  best  manner  calculated  to  subserve  the  ends  of 
infinite  wisdom  and  goodness.  Not  that  all  things  and  events 
have  this  tendency  in  their  own  nature.  No,  many  of  them  have 
a  diametrically  opposite  tendency.  Still  under  the  overruhng 
hand  of  God  they  are  made  to  subserve  the  best  purposes. 

This  then  is  one  great  comfort  which  the  christian  has  under 
all  hre  afflictions.  Though  he  suffers,  he  suffers  not  in  vain. 
His  sufferings  answer  most  important  and  benevolent  purposes. 
God  is  thereby  glorified  and  the  happiness  of  the  creation  is  pro- 

VoL.  II.  16 


178 


GOD  A  KEFUGE  AND  HELP. 


moted.  And  nothing  can  be  more  comforting  and  supporting 
than  this,  to  every  benevolent  soul. 

4.  The  consideration  that  our  afflictions  will,  unless  we  mis- 
improve  them,  subserve  our  own  personal  good  too,  is  of  the 
same  strengthening  tendency.  If  we  improve  our  afflictions 
aright,  we  shall  be  humbled  under  them,  shall  repent  of  our  sins, 
M'hich  are  the  procuring  cause  of  all  divine  chastisements,  and 
shall  give  glory  to  God.  And  if  we  do  thus,  it  will  prove,  that 
we  are  reconciled  to  God  and  are  of  those  who  love  God.  But 
we  know  that  all  things  work  together  for  good  to  them  that  love 
God.  Therefore  their  afflictions,  as  they  respect  them  personally, 
are  not  in  vain.  Their  present  light  afflictions,  which  are  but  for 
a  moment,  work  out  for  them  a  far  more  exceeding  and  eternal 
weight  of  glory. 

In  this  view,  how  can  they,  even  from  regard  to  their  own  per- 
sonal interest,  wish  their  afflictions  had  not  come  upon  them  ? 
Would  they  wish  their  final  happiness  to  be  diminished  ?  Would 
they  wish  their  own  best  interest  to  be  in  a  less  degree  promoted  ? 

Beside  these  general  observations  concerning  all  afflictions, 
there  are  particular  considerations  adapted  to  support  under  par- 
ticular afflictions. 

1 .  Under  personal  afflictions.  If  we  be  visited  with  sickness, 
God  is  able  to  heal  us,  and  he  will,  if  it  be  best ;  if  it  be  most 
for  his  glory,  and  our  good.  Do  we  meet  with  losses  ?  God  who 
gave  us  all  we  have  or  ever  have  had,  has  a  perfect  right  to  take 
it  all  from  us,  and  at  such  time  and  in  such  manner  as  he  pleases. 
And  if  God  deprive  us  of  temporal  good  things,  still  he  has  pro- 
vided for  us  eternal  good  things,  even  durable  riches  and  right- 
eousness ;  he  offers  these  to  us,  freely,  without  money  and  with- 
out price.  Though  we  suffer  shame  and  obloquy  here,  we  may 
inherit  divine  honors  hereafter  ;  we  may  be  made  kings  and 
priests  unto  God,  and  inherit  a  crown  of  glory  which  shall  not 
fade  away.  Though  we  lose  our  present  lives,  we  may  secure 
eternal  life,  a  life  of  complete  happiness  and  inconceivable  glory. 

2.  Under  bereavements  he  can  more  than  make  up  the  loss 
by  his  special  grace.  Also  he  can  raise  up  other  friends  who 
shall  be  equally  benevolent,  as  those  whom  he  hath  taken  away. 
Or  he  can  provide  for  us  and  protect  us  by  his  special  providence. 
When  father  and  mother  forsake  us,  he  can  take  us  up.  He 
styles  himself  "  a  father  of  the  fatherless  and  a  judge  of  widows." 
He  can  take  care  of  them  in  every  situation  in  life,  and  provide 
for  them  in  all  their  variety  of  circumstances  ;  he  can  make  even 
their  losses  to  work  together  for  their  good ;  so  that  while  they 
are  deprived  of  their  dearest  and  most  important  friends  and  rela- 


GOD  A  KEFUGE  AND  HELP.  179 

lives,  they  may  be  made  rich  in  faith  and  heirs  of  the  kingdom. 
Thus  all  their  afflictions  may  issue  in  their  unspeakable  gain. 

Such  losses  teach  those  who  are  the  subjects  of  them,  to  trust 
not  in  the  creature,  but  in  the  Creator.  They  tend  to  draw  off 
their  affections  from  sublunary  enjoyments  and  objects ;  to  show 
them  the  vanity  of  all  hopes  from  them  and  dependence  on  them  ; 
and  to  excite  them  to  seek  another  and  a  better  portion.  De- 
prived of  their  parent,  their  friend,  their  guardian,  they  have 
strong  motives  set  before  them  to  seek  a  better  friend,  a  more 
bountiful  benefactor,  a  more  able  protector,  and  a  more  excel- 
lent father.  When  our  friends  or  relatives  are  removed  by  death, 
it  strongly  reminds  us  of  our  own  death.  When  they  are  gone 
into  the  eternal  world,  this  naturally  leads  us  to  think  more  of 
that  world,  and  to  realize  that  we  ourselves  must  shortly  go  thither, 
and  that  therefore  we  ought  to  prepare. 

3.  When  we  are  under  public  frowns  and  calamities,  we  ought 
to  remember,  that  God  reigns  over  nations  as  well  as  over  indi- 
viduals ;  that  we  may  as  safely  leave  our  national,  as  our  private 
concerns  with  him  ;  and  that  with  respect  to  these  and  all  other 
things  we  ought  to  make  him  our  refuge  and  our  strength. 

4.  Under  spiritual  troubles  our  obligation  to  have  recourse  to 
God  for  help  is,  if  possible,  still  greater,  than  when  we  are  under 
troubles  of  any  other  kind.  For  our  dependence  on  him  in  this 
case  is  more  immediate  and  more  manifest  than  in  any  other. 
Who  but  he  can  heal  the  broken  spirit,  can  forgive  sins,  can  sanctify 
the  soul  or  can  save  from  eternal  perdition  ?  And  he  is  abundantly 
and  infinitely  able  and  is  ready  to  grant  these  spiritual  and  inesti- 
mable blessings  to  those  who  truly  apply  to  him  for  them. 

III.  It  was  proposed  to  show,  that  he  is  a  very  present  help 
in  trouble. 

He  is  always  immediately  present  with  us  both  as  to  time  and 
place.  We  cannot  escape  from  his  presence.  He  therefore  is 
always  at  hand  to  receive  our  applications,  to  hear  our  prayers, 
and  to  afford  us  help.  This  is  certainly  a  very  great  advantage. 
Help  at  a  very  great  distance  either  of  time  or  place  is  not  to  be 
compared  to  that  which  is  present.  Before  it  shall  arrive,  we 
may  be  wholly  overwhelmed  and  ruined. 

Thus  I  have  briefly  considered  the  several  subjects,  which 
seemed  naturally  to  arise  from  our  text ;  I  am  now  to  apply  these 
general  observations  to  the  present  mournful  occasion.  The  pre- 
sent is  a  time  of  trouble  and  affliction.  The  death  of  that  emi- 
nent and  excellent  man,  whose  remains  are  now  to  be  laid  in  the 
dust,  is  a  source  of  affliction  in  several  respects  ;  it  is  so  to  his 
family,  to  all  his  friends,  to  the  church  of  which  he  was  a  mem- 


180  GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP. 

her,  to  this  city,  to  the  State  and  to  the  United  States.  In  this 
death  they  have  all  sustained  a  loss. 

That  we  may  rightly  estimate  this  loss,  and  be  properly  hum- 
bled under  the  divine  chastisement,  let  us  take  a  brief  survey  of 
his  life  and  character. 

He  was  born  at  Newtown  in  Massachusetts,  April  19,  1721. 
He  was  the  son  of  Mr.  William  Sherman,  the  son  of  Joseph 
Sherman  Esq.,  the  son  of  Capt.  John  Sherman,  who  came  from 
Dedham  in  England  to  Watertown  in  Massachusetts,  about  the 
year  1635.  He  was  not  favored  with  a  public  education  or  even 
with  a  private  tutor.  His  superior  improvements  arose  from  his 
superior  genius,  from  his  thirst  for  knowledge  and  from  his  per- 
sonal exertions  and  indefatigable  industry  in  the  pursuit  of  it.* 
By  these  he  attained  to  a  very  considerable  share  of  knowledge 
in  general,  particularly  in  his  own  native  language,  in  logic,  geo- 
graphy, mathematics,  the  general  principles  of  philosophy,  history, 
theology  and  above  all  in  law  and  politics.  These  last  were  his 
favorite  studies,  and  in  these  he  excelled.  If  he  in  this  manner 
attained  to  the  same  improvements  and  capacity  of  usefulness,  to 
which  others  attain  not  without  the  greatest  advantages  of  edu- 
cation, how  far  would  he  have  outstripped  them,  had  he  been 
favored  with  their  advantages  ? 

His  father  died  when  he  was  but  nineteen  years  old,  and  from 
that  time  the  care  of  his  mother,  who  lived  to  a  great  age,  and 
the  education  of  a  numerous  family  of  brothers  and  sisters,  were 
devolved  on  him.  In  this  part  of  his  life  filial  piety  to  a  parent 
at  length  worn  out  by  age  both  as  to  body  and  mind  ;  and  fra- 
ternal affection  to  his  brothers  and  sisters  now  in  a  good  measure 
dependent  on  him,  appeared  in  an  unusual  degree.  Though 
cramped  in  his  own  education,  he  assisted  by  advancements  of 
his  own  property,  two  of  his  brethren  to  a  liberal  education. 

Before  he  was  twenty-one,  he  made  a  public  profession  of  reli- 
gion, which  he  adorned  through  life. 

He  came  to  this  then  Colony  of  Connecticut  and  settled  at 
New  Milford  in  June,  1743,  being  then  twenty-two  years  of  age  ; 
and  at  the  age  of  twenty-eight  was  married  to  Miss  Elizabeth 
Hartwell  of  Stoughton  in  Massachusetts,  by  whom  he  had  seven 
children,  two  of  whom  died  young  at  New  Milford,  and  two 
since  he  resided  in  this  town.  His  wife  died  in  October,  1760. 
At  New  Milford  he  was  much  respected  by  his  fellow  citizens 

*  Hence  with  great  propriety  the  poet  speaking  of  the  declaration  of 
independence  by  Congress,  in  which  Mr.  Sherman  acted  a  distinguished 
part,  says, 

The  self-taught  Sherman  urged  his  reasons  clear. — Humphre7js'  Poems. 


GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP.  181 

and  much  employed  in  public  business.  In  1745,  within  two 
years  of  his  removal  into  the  Colony,  and  when  he  was  of  the 
age  of  twenty-four,  he  was  appointed  a  surveyor  of  lands  for  the 
county  in  which  he  resided  ;  which  is  a  proof  of  his  early  im- 
provement in  mathematical  knowledge. 

Although  he  was  not  educated  a  lawyer,  yet  by  his  abilities 
and  application  he  had  acquired  such  knowledge  in  the  law,  and 
such  a  reputation  as  a  counsellor,  that  he  was  persuaded  by  his 
friends  to  come  forward  to  the  bar,  and  was  accordingly  admit- 
ted an  attorney  at  law,  in  December,  1754.  The  next  year  he 
was  appointed  a  justice  of  the  peace  and  was  chosen  by  the  free- 
men of  the  town  to  represent  them  in  the  legislature,  as  he  was 
generally  thenceforward,  during  his  continuance  at  New  Milford. 
Also  he  sustained  the  office  of  a  deacon  in  the  church  in  that 
town. 

He  continued  to  practise  the  law  with  reputation,  till  May,  1759, 
when  he  was  appointed  a  justice  of  the  court  of  common  pleas 
for  the  county. 

He  removed  to  this  town  in  the  year  1761.  Having  lost  his 
wife,  as  was  before  observed,  he  was  in  May,  1763,  married  to 
Miss  Rebecca  Prescot  of  Danvers  in  Massachusetts,  by  whom  he 
had  eight  children,  seven  of  whom  are  now  living. 

After  his  removal  to  this  town,  he  was  made  a  justice  of  the 
peace  for  the  county  of  New  Haven,  frequently  representing  the 
town  in  the  legislature,  and  in  1765  was  appointed  one  of  the 
justices  of  the  court  of  common  pleas  for  this  county.  He  was 
for  many  years  the  treasurer  of  the  college  in  this  city,  and  re- 
ceived an  honorary  degree  of  Master  of  Arts. 

In  1766  he  was  by  the  voice  of  the  freemen  of  the  Colony  at 
large,  chosen  an  Assistant,  and  in  the  same  year  was  appointed 
a  Judge  of  the  Superior  Court.  This  last  office  he  sustained  for 
twenty-three  years,  and  the  office  of  an  Assistant  for  nineteen 
years ;  after  which  the  law  was  enacted  rendering  the  two  offices 
incompatible  and  he  chose  to  continue  in  the  office  of  a  Judge. 

He  was  a  member  of  the  first  Congress  in  1774  ;  he  was  pre- 
sent and  signed  the  glorious  act  of  Independence  in  1776  ;  and 
invariably  continued  a  member  of  Congress,  from  the  first  Con- 
gress till  his  death,  whenever  the  law  requiring  a  rotation  in  the 
representation  admitted  it. 

In  the  time  of  the  war  he  was  a  member  of  the  Governor's 
Council  of  safety  of  this  State. 

About  the  close  of  the  late  war,  the  legislature  of  this  State  re- 
solved, that  the  laws  of  the  State  should  be  revised  and  amend- 
ed ;  and  Mr.  Sherman  was  one  of  a  committee  of  two,  to  whom 

16* 


182  GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP. 

this  service  was  assigned  ;  their  proceedings  being  subject  to  cor- 
rection by  the  legislature  itself ;  and  he  performed  this  arduous 
service  with  great  approbation. 

In  1787  he  was  appointed  by  the  State  a  delegate  to  the  Gen- 
eral Convention  to  form  the  federal  constitution  of  the  United 
States  ;  and  he  acted  a  conspicuous  part  in  that  business.  In  the 
convention  of  this  State  to  deliberate  concerning  that  constitution, 
he  had  great  influence  toward  the  adoption  of  it  by  this  State. 

On  the  general  adoption  and  ratification  of  the  constitution, 
he  was  elected  a  representative  of  the  State  in  Congress.  As 
this  office  was  incompatible  with  the  office  of  a  Judge,  he  then 
resigned  the  latter  and  sustained  the  former  till  the  year  1791,  at 
which  time  a  vacancy  for  this  State  happening  in  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States,  he  was  elected  to  fill  it ;  and  in  thi.s  office  he 
continued  till  his  death. 

On  repeating  thus  briefly  the  history  of  this  eminent  and  excel- 
lent man,  it  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  though  he  sustained  so 
many  diflisrent  offices  in  civil  government,  to  all  which  he  was 
promoted  by  the  free  election  of  his  fellow  citizens,  and  in  most 
of  which  he  could  not,  without  a  new  election,  continue  longer 
than  a  year ;  and  in  the  rest,  except  one,  he  could  not,  without 
a  new  election,  continue  longer  than  two,  three  or  four  years  ; 
and  although  for  all  these  offices  there  were,  as  there  always  are 
in  popular  governments,  many  competitors  at  every  election  ;  yet 
our  deceased  friend  was  never  removed  from  any  one  of  them, 
but  by  promotion  or  by  act  of  legislature  requiring  a  rotation,  or 
rendering  the  offices  incompatible  with  each  other.  Nor  with 
the  restriction  just  mentioned,  did  he  ever  lose  his  election  to  any 
office,  to  which  he  had  been  once  elected,  excepting  his  election 
as  a  representative  of  the  town  in  the  legislature  of  the  State  ; 
which  office  we  all  know,  is  almost  constantly  shifting.  This 
shows  to  how  great  a  degree  and  how  invariably  he  possessed  the 
confidence  of  his  fellow  citizens.  They  found  by  experience, 
that  both  his  abilities  and  his  integrity  merited  their  confidence. 

Beside  this  brief  history,  perhaps  some  further  account  of  Mr. 
Sherman  will  on  this  occasion  be  expected. 

I  need  not  inform  you,  that  his  person  was  tall,  unusually  erect 
and  well  proportioned,  and  his  countenance  agreeable  and  manly. 
His  abilities  were  remarkable,  not  brilliant,  but  solid,  penetrating 
and  capable  of  deep  and  long  investigation.  In  such  investiga- 
tion he  was  greatly  assisted  by  his  patient  and  unremitting  appli- 
cation and  perseverance.  While  others  weary  of  a  short  atten- 
tion to  business,  were  relaxing  themselves  in  thoughtless  inatten- 
tion or  dissipation,  he  was  employed  in  prosecuting  the  same 


GOD  A  REFUGE  AND  HELP.  183 

business,  either  by  revolving  it  in  his  mind  and  ripening  his  own 
thoughts  upon  it,  or  in  conferring  with  others. 

It  has  been  observed,  that  he  had  a  taste  for  general  improve- 
ment and  did  actually  improve  himself  in  science  in  general.  He 
could  with  reputation  to  himself  and  improvement  to  others  con- 
verse on  the  most  important  subjects  of  theology.  I  confess  my- 
self to  have  been  often  entertained,  and  in  the  general'course  of 
my  long  and  intimate  acquaintance  with  him,  to  have  been  much 
improved  by  his  observations  on  the  principal  subjects  of  doctri- 
nal and  practical  divinity. 

But  his  proper  line  was  politics.  For  usefulness  and  excellence 
in  this  line,  he  was  qualified  not  only  by  his  acute  discernment 
and  sound  judgment,  but  especially  by  his  knowledge  of  human 
nature.  He  had  a  happy  talent  of  judging  what  was  feasible  and 
what  was  not  feasible,  or  what  men  would  bear,  and  what  they 
would  not  bear  in  government.  And  he  had  a  rare  talent  of  pru- 
dence, or  of  timing  and  adapting  his  measures  to  the  attainment 
of  his  end.  By  this  talent,  by  his  perseverance  and  his  indefati- 
gable application,  together  with  his  general  good  sense  and  known 
integrity,  he  seldom  failed  of  carrying  any  point  in  government 
wiiich  he  undertook  and  which  he  esteemed  important  to  the 
public  good.  His  abilities  and  success  as  a  politician  were  suc- 
cessively proved  in  the  legislature  of  this  State  and  in  Congress ; 
and  his  great  and  merited  influence  in  both  those  bodies,  has  been, 
I  believe,  universally  acknowledged. 

As  he  was  always  industrious,  he  was  always  ready  to  discharge 
the  various  duties  of  his  various  offices.  In  the  discharge  of 
those  duties,  as  well  as  in  the  more  private  offices  of  friendship, 
he  was  firm  and  might  be  depended  on. 

That  he  was  generous  and  ready  to  communicate,  I  can  testi- 
fy from  my  own  experience.  He  was  ready  to  bear  his  part  of 
the  expense  of  those  designs,  public  and  private,  which  he  es- 
teemed useful  ;  and  he  was  given  to  hospitality. 

As  he  was  a  professor  of  religion,  so  he  was  not  ashamed  to  be- 
friend it,  to  appear  openly  on  the  Lord's  side,  or  to  avow  and 
defend  the  peculiar  doctrines  of  grace.  He  was  exemplary  in 
attending  all  the  institutions  of  the  gospel,  in  the  practice  of  vir- 
tue in  general  and  in  showing  himself  friendly  to  all  good  men. 
Therefore  in  his  death,  virtue,  religion  and  good  men  have  sus- 
tained the  loss  of  a  sincere,  an  able  and  a  bold  friend,  a  friend  who 
was  in  an  elevated  situation,  and  who  was  therefore  by  his  coun- 
tenance and  support  able  to  afford  them  the  more  effectual  aid. 

In  private  life,  though  he  was  naturally  reserved  and  of  few 
words,  yet  in  conversation  on  matters  of  importance,  he  was  free 


184  GOD  A  RElTUGE  AND  HELP. 

and  communicative.     With  all  his  elevation  and  all  his  honors, 
he  was  not  at  all  lifted  up,  but  appeared  perfectly  unmoved. 

In  the  private  relations  of  husband,  father,  friend,  etc.  he  was 
entirely  kind,  affectionate,  faithful  and  constant. 

In  short,  whether  we  consider  him  in  public  or  private  life ; 
whether  we  consider  him  as  a  politician  or  a  christian,  he  was  a 
great  and  a  good  man.  The  words  of  David  concerning  Abner 
may  with  great  truth  be  applied  on  this  occasion  :  "  Know  ye 
not,  that  there  is  a  great  man  fallen  this  day  in  Israel  ?" 

To  have  sustained  so  many  and  so  important  public  offices, 
and  to  have  uniformly  sustained  them  with  honor  and  reputation  ; 
to  have  maintained  an  amiable  character  in  every  private  rela- 
tion ;  to  have  been  an  ornament  to  Christianity  and  to  have  died 
in  a  good  old  age,  in  the  full  possession  of  all  his  honors,  and  of 
his  powers  both  of  body  and  mind,  is  a  very  rare  attainment,  and 
a  very  happy  juncture  of  circumstances. 

From  this  brief  survey  of  the  character  of  this  our  excellent 
friend,  we  see  our  loss  and  how  great  are  the  tokens  of  divine 
displeasure,  which  we  suffer  this  day.  The  loss  is  great  to  our 
whole  country,  the  United  States,  for  he  was  still  capable  of  em- 
inent usefulness.  It  is  great  to  this  State  ;  it  is  great  to  this  city, 
of  which  he  was  the  first  magistrate  ;  it  is  still  greater  to  this 
church  and  society,  of  which  he  was  so  amiable,  eminent  and 
useful  a  member  ;  but  it  is  greatest  of  all  to  his  family. 

Yet  there  are  not  wanting  motives  of  consolation  in  all  these 
cases.  God  lives  and  reigns  ;  let  us  make  him  our  refuge  and 
our  strength,  he  is  able  to  help  us  in  all  our  trouble.  He  is  able 
to  take  care  of  the  United  States,  of  this  State,  of  this  city,  of 
this  church  and  society  and  of  the  bereaved  family.  The  direc- 
tion of  God  himself  is,  "Leave  your  fatherless  children,  I  will 
preserve  them  alive,  and  let  your  widows  trust  in  me."  The 
death  of  this  our  friend  may  be  designed  in  mercy  to  his  chil- 
dren ;  it  may  be  designed  to  lead  them  to  think  more  of  death 
and  the  eternal  world,  and  more  of  the  necessity  of  preparation 
for  death,  and  to  excite  them  actually  to  prepare,  by  choosing 
God  for  their  father  and  by  making  him  their  refuge  and  strength. 
Thus  their  present  loss,  though  great,  may  be  the  happy  means 
of  their  unspeakable  gain.  Also  it  may  lead  the  widow  to  rely 
more  on  her  Creator. 

May  not  only  the  bereaved  widow  and  children  make  such  an 
improvement  of  this  afflictive  dispensation,  but  may  we  all  do 
the  same  ;  that  when  death  shall  overtake  us,  as  it  will  very  soon, 
we  may  have  God  for  our  father  and  friend,  to  conduct  us  safe 
through  the  valley  of  the  shadow  of  death  and  afterward  to  re- 
ceive us  to  glory. 


SERMON    XI 


THE  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY  NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL 
PROSPERITY.* 

Psalm  144  :  15. — Yea,  happy  is  that  people  whose  God  is  the  Lord. 

In  this  passage  of  sacred  scripture,  that  people  is  pronounced 
happy,  whose  God  is  the  Lord.  But  what  is  the  meaning  of  the 
expression,  "  whose  God  is  the  Lord  ?"  or  when  may  it  be  truly 
said,  that  the  God  of  any  people  is  the  Lord  ?  The  answer  is, 
when  they  believe,  worship  and  obey  the  Lord  or  Jehovah,  as  the 
only  true  God,  and  that  according  to  his  revealed  will.  The 
Lord  was  the  God  of  the  Israelites,  when  they  complied  with  the 
dispensation,  under  which  they  lived  ;  and  he  is  our  God,  when 
we  cordially  believe  and  comply  with  the  gospel.  If  we  do  so, 
the  text  pronounces  us  happy  ;  and  it  plainly  implies,  that  we 
cannot  be  happy  on  any  condition  short  of  this. 

Therefore  the  subject,  which  I  beg  leave  to  propose  from  our 
text  for  present  consideration,  is  this. 

The  necessity  of  a  belief  of  Christianity  by  the  citizens  of 
this  state,  in  order  to  our  public  and  political  prosperity. 

This  proposition  is  plainly  implied  in  the  text.  For  if  that 
people  only  be  happy  or  prosperous,  whose  God  is  the  Lord  ; 
and  if  to  believe  and  comply  with  Christianity  be  implied  in  hav- 
ing the  Lord  for  our  God  ;  it  follows,  that  the  belief  of  Chris- 
tianity by  the  citizens  of  this  state,  is  necessary  to  our  political 
prosperity. 

Political  prosperity  requires  the  general  practice  of  a  strict  mo- 
rality. But  this  cannot  be  so  well  secured  by  any  other  means, 
as  by  a  belief  of  Christianity.  Motives  of  a  religious  kind  ap- 
pear to  be  necessary  to  restrain  men  from  vice  and  immorality. 
Civil  pains  and  penalties  alone  are  by  no  means  sufficient  to  this 
end  ;  nor  are  civil  honors  and  rewards  sufficient  encouragements 
to  the  practice  of  virtue  in  general.     The  civil  magistrate  does 

*  Preached  before  his  Excellency,  Samuel  Huntington,  LL.  D.,  Govern- 
or, and  the  honorable  the  General  Assembly  of  the  state  of  Connecticut, 
May  8th,  1794,  and  printed  at  their  request. 


186  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

not  pretend  to  reward  virtue  in  general  according  to  its  moral  ex- 
cellency. He  does  indeed  reward  some  particular  acts  of  virtue, 
which  are  highly  beneficial  to  the  public.  But  the  many  virtues 
of  private  life  pass  without  any  other  reward  from  him  than  the 
bare  protection,  which  is  afforded  in  common  to  the  persons  who 
practise  those  virtues,  and  to  all  who  are  free  from  gross  crimes. 

Nor  does  the  magistrate  pretend  to  punish  vice  in  general. 
He  does  undertake  to  punish  those  gross  vices,  which  consist  in 
the  violations  of  the  perfect  rights  of  men,  and  in  those  cases  on- 
ly, in  which  the  violations  are  both  manifest  and  are  manifestly 
proved  before  a  proper  tribunal.  But  all  violations  of  even  these 
rights  which  are  perpetrated  in  private,  or  which,  though  perpe- 
trated publicly,  are  not  legally  proved,  pass  entirely  free  from 
civil  pains  and  penalties.  The  same  is  true  of  all  violations  of 
the  imperfect  rights,  as  they  are  called,  which  are  violated  by  in- 
gratitude, selfishness,  neglect  of  kind  offices,  etc.  Yet  these 
vices  are  in  their  consequences,  often  as  hurtful  to  the  public 
good  as  injustice,  fraud  or  robbery  ;  and  indeed  the  former  are 
the  source  of  the  latter.  Now  to  restrain  from  vices  of  this  lat- 
ter description,  from  all  vices  practised  in  private,  and  from  vice 
in  general,  nothing  is  so  useful  as  a  full  belief  of  a  final  judgment, 
and  of  a  subsequent  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  in  which 
all  sin  not  renounced  by  sincere  repentance,  shall  be  punished, 
and  every  man  shall  receive  according  to  that  which  he  does  in 
the  body,  whether  it  be  good  or  evil. 

Let  us  suppose  a  citizen  restrained  from  vice  by  the  fear  of 
civil  penalties  only.  Such  a  person  will  feel  himself  under  no 
obligation  to  pay  either  public  or  private  debts,  unless  he  expects 
legal  judgment  and  execution  ;  and  under  no  obligation  to  speak 
the  truth,  unless  he  fears  a  prosecution  for  fraud  or  defamation. 
He  will  feel  himself  at  liberty  to  live  in  idleness,  profusion,  in- 
temperance and  lust,  and  to  take  every  advantage  consistent  with 
law,  to  defraud  and  oppress  his  fellow  citizens.  He  will  requite 
no  kind  offices,  as  he  has  no  motive  to  gratitude.  He  will  have 
no  motive  to  the  greater  part  of  his  duty  to  his  own  children,  and 
in  a  thousand  instances  may  neglect  them,  when  he  is  bound  by 
the  strictest  moral  obligation,  to  assist  and  do  them  good.  He 
may  indulge  himself  in  passion  and  ill  nature,  in  contention  and 
violence,  so  far  as  not  to  expose  himself  to  the  law  ;  and  of 
course  will  take  no  pains  to  preserve  peace  among  his  neigh- 
bors ;  but  will  rather,  as  his  humor  happens  to  be,  foment  by 
words  and  actions,  animosities,  law-suits  and  contentions  in  every 
form.  Ever  complaining  under  the  mildest  and  justest  govern- 
ment, he  will  in  numberless  ways  oppose  measures,  and  espe- 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  187 

cially  expenses,  subservient  and  necessary  to  the  public  good  ; 
and  will  excite  and  spread  discontent  among  others.  Now  is  this 
a  good  citizen  ?  What  if  the  whole  state  consisted  of  such  citi- 
zens ?     Could  it  enjoy  political  prosperity  ? 

The  best  and  perhaps  the  only  remedy  for  such  diseases,  is  a 
full  belief  of  the  divine  universal  providence,  of  the  accountable- 
ness  of  all  men  to  God  for  all  their  conduct,  and  of  a  future  equal 
retribution. 

Some  religion  then,  and  some  belief  of  a  future  state  is  neces- 
sary to  our  political  prosperity.  But  what  religion  shall  we  adopt  ? 
and  what  system  concerning  a  future  state  is  most  useful  to  the 
state  ?  It  is  not  possible  to  introduce  and  give  a  general  spread 
through  the  state,  to  Mohammedanism  or  paganism  ;  and  it  would 
be  a  work  of  time  and  of  great  difficulty,  to  lead  the  citizens  in 
general  into  the  belief  of  deism  or  what  is  called  the  philosophi- 
cal religion.  Therefore  we  seem  necessitated  to  have  recourse 
to  Christianity  ;  and  this  is  most  excellently  adapted  to  the  ends 
of  restraining  men  from  vice  and  promoting  that  general  practice 
of  strict  morality,  which  is  so  essential  to  the  political  prosperity 
of  any  people.  It  is  adapted  to  these  ends  by  its  precepts  ;  by 
the  moral  character  of  the  author  of  those  precepts  ;  by  his  ab- 
solute supremacy  and  sovereignty  ;  by  the  motives  of  reward  and 
punishment  with  which  those  precepts  are  enforced  ;  by  the  facts 
which  it  relates,  and  by  the  examples  which  it  exhibits.  It  is 
enforced  not  by  the  bare  authority  of  our  feeble  reason,  but  by 
the  authority  of  our  Creator,  our  Judge,  and  our  all-perfect  God. 
It  depends  not  on  the  obscure  investigations,  subtile  refinements 
and  uncertain  conclusions  of  human  intellect ;  but  on  the  omni- 
science, the  veracity,  the  justice,  the  goodness  and  the  will  of 
God.  And  thus  it  is  excellently  adapted  to  the  principles  and 
feelings  which  are  common  to  human  nature,  and  which  exist  in 
the  weakest  and  most  ignorant,  as  well  as  the  most  intelligent 
and  learned.  A  man  who  cannot  follow  the  shortest  and  most 
easy  chain  of  reasoning  on  the  nature  of  things  and  the  tendency 
of  human  actions,  and  who  will  not  from  such  reasoning  feel  iiis 
obligation  to  virtue  in  general  or  to  particular  virtues,  will  at 
once  feel  the  force  of  the  positive  and  authoritative  declarations 
and  requisitions  of  the  Almighty  ;  and  where  is  the  man,  learned 
or  unlearned,  of  weak  or  strong  powers,  who  does  not  see  and 
feel  the  difference  between  the  advice  and  directions  of  some 
learned  and  acute  philosopher,  and  thus  sciith  the  Lord  1  Above 
all,  the  motives  arising  from  the  doctrines  of  the  final  judgment 
and  a  future  state,  lay  an  inconceivably  greater  restraint  on  the 
depravity  of  human  nature,  than  anything  that  is  or  can  be  sug- 
gested by  the  philosophical  religion. 


188  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

Let  us  compare  this  religion  with  Christianity  in  a  few  parti- 
culars, which  immediately  relate  to  our  present  subject. 

It  is  a  maxim  of  infidelity  to  follow  nature.  Now  to  follow 
her,  is  to  follow  all  the  appetites  and  passions  of  which  we  are 
naturally  the  subjects ;  and  this  will  lead  to  all  kinds  of  vice. 
But  it  is  a  maxim  of  Christianity,  to  follow  the  divine  law,  the 
precepts  of  the  gospel  and  the  example  of  Christ ;  and  whether 
these  lead  to  vice  or  virtue,  I  need  not  inform  you. 

Another  maxim  of  infidelity  is,  that  man  was  made  for  his  own 
happiness ;  that  is,  that  every  man  was  made  for  his  own  indi- 
vidual happiness.  This  then  is  to  be  the  supreme  object  of  eve- 
ry man  ;  and  this  object  is  to  be  pursued,  as  infidels  themselves 
teach,  by  gratifying  his  natural  appetites  and  passions,  which 
brings  us  just  wliere  we  were  before,  to  all  vice  and  wickedness. 
And  if  an  infidel  deny  his  appetites  and  passions,  he  must  be 
governed  by  other  motives  than  any  which  his  system  of  morali- 
ty suggests.  But  Christianity  teaches,  that  we  were  created  for 
an  end,  which  so  far  as  we  pursue,  we  cannot  fail  of  sincere  pie- 
ty and  strict  morality. 

Infidels  are  divided  into  two  classes,  those  who  deny  a  future 
state  of  existence,  and  those  who  allow  such  a  state.  The  form- 
er deny  all  moral  government  of  God,  and  that  we  are  at  all  ac- 
countable to  him ;  and  some  of  the  most  noted  among  them  de- 
ny any  evidence  of  his  moral  perfections.  Now  it  is  manifest, 
that  according  to  this  system  mankind  can  be  under  no  restraint 
from  vice,  by  the  consideration  of  a  future  state  of  rewards  and 
punishments,  or  by  the  consideration  of  their  accountableness  to 
God,  or  of  his  commands  or  prohibitions.  Nor  does  this  system 
admit  of  any  motives  derived  from  these  sources,  to  the  practice 
of  virtue.  Yet  these  motives,  with  respect  to  mankind  in  the 
gross,  are  the  most  powerful.  The  authors  and  abettors  of  this 
system  seem  to  rely  on  a  sense  of  honor,  as  the  great  motive  to 
virtue  and  restraint  from  vice.  And  what  is  this  sense  of  honor  1 
If  it  be  a  sense  of  shame  in  doing  wrong,  and  a  sense  of  the  hon- 
orableness  of  doing  right,  it  is  a  mere  sense  or  knowledge  of 
right  and  wrong  ;  and  this  so  far  as  it  is  founded  on  truth,  is  un- 
doubtedly a  proper  rule  of  conduct,  and  a  man  who  is  disposed 
to  virtue,  will  practise  according  to  this  rule.  But  how  are  men 
in  general,  without  the  aid  of  revelation,  to  attain,  in  all  cases,  to 
the  knowledge  of  right  and  wrong,  of  virtue  and  vice  ?  It  is 
manifest  by  abundant  experience  both  ancient  and  modern,  that 
mere  human  reason  is  insufficient  for  this. 

If  by  this  sense  of  honor  be  meant,  as  I  imagine  is  generally 
meant,  a  sense   of  our  own  supposed  personal  dignity,  a  pride 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  189 

naturally  arising  from  this  sense,  and  a  disposition  to  resent  and 
revenge  everything  which  is  grating  to  our  pride ;  this  in  many 
cases  is  so  far  from  a  motive  to  virtue  and  restraint  from  vice, 
that  it  is  itself  a  vice.  Let  this  sense  of  honor  be  ever  so  well 
limited  and  explained,  it  cannot  be  a  motive  to  virtue  and  a  re- 
straint from  vice  to  all  men  ;  because  it  does  not  reach  and  can- 
not influence  all  men.  How  many  are  there  in  every  nation  and 
country,  who  have  very  little  sense  of  their  own  dignity,  and  very 
little  elevation  of  soul  in  a  consciousness  of  it  ?  How  many  are 
there,  who  in  a  prospect  of  gain,  would  not  scruple  to  betray 
their  friends,  to  steal  their  neighbor's  property  or  to  betray  their 
country  ? 

It  is  manifest  therefore,  that  this  philosophical  religion,  could 
it  be  generally  introduced  and  established  among  us,  would  be  a 
very  great  political  evil,  as  it  would  weaken  and  even  annihilate 
those  motives  to  virtue  and  restraints  from  vice,  which  are  most 
powerful  on  the  minds  of  men  in  general. 

Besides  ;  this  system  so  far  as  it  denies  the  evidence  of  the 
moral  perfections  of  God,  not  only  cuts  off  the  motives  to  virtue, 
drawn  from  a  future  state  and  from  those  divine  perfections  ;  but 
even  suggests  motives  to  vice.  If  it  be  a  matter  of  uncertainty, 
whether  God  be  a  friend  to  virtue  or  a  friend  to  vice,  it  may  be, 
that  we  shall  please  him  most  by  an  unrestrained  indulgence  of 
vice,  and  by  the  practice  of  virtue  shall  provoke  his  malice  and 
vengeance.  Nay,  if  it  be  a  matter  of  uncertainty,  whether  the 
Deity  be  a  benevolent  or  malicious  being,  we  can  have  no  cer- 
tainty, but  that  he  will  give  us  an  existence  in  a  future  state,  on 
purpose  to  gratify  his  malevolence  in  our  everlasting  torment. 
And  to  be  consistent,  the  advocates  for  the  system  now  under 
consideration  should  not  say  a  word  against  the  christian  doctrine 
of  endless  punishment,  on  the  ground  of  its  supposed  injustice  or 
opposition  to  grace  and  mercy  ;  because  they  acknowledge,  that 
they  know  not,  that  God  is  just,  gracious  or  merciful. 

Thus  this  scheme,  which  was  invented  to  avoid  the  fears  of 
future  punishment,  defeats  itself;  and  while  it  attempts  to  de- 
liver us  from  a  just  punishment,  leaves  us  exposed  to  any  punish- 
ment ever  so  unjust,  cruel  and  malicious. 

As  to  that  kind  of  infidelity,  which  allows  the  divine  moral 
perfections  and  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishment ;  though 
this  is  more  plausible  than  the  former ;  yet  the  motives  to  virtue 
and  restraints  from  vice,  which  it  affords,  are  not  to  be  compared 
with  those  of  the  gospel.  Agreeably  to  the  gospel  all  men  are  to 
be  rewarded  according  to  their  works  done  in  the  body,  whether 
they  be  good  or  evil.     Some  are  to  be  beaten  with  few  stripes. 

Vol.  II.  17 


190  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITF 

some  with  many  stripes,  according  to  their  several  aggravations  of 
guilt.  But  in  the  future  punishment  vi^hich  infidels  admit,  there  is 
nothing  vindictive,  nothing  therefore  which  is  intended  to  support 
law  and  government.  The  only  punishment  which  they  admit,  is 
that  which  is  designed  for  the  good  of  the  person  punished  ;*  and 
therefore  as  soon  as  the  person  punished  repents,  he  is  released. 
Now  it  is  manifest  on  the  slightest  reflection,  that  the  motive  to 
avoid  sin  and  vice  on  this  plan,  is  exceedingly  diminished  from 
what  it  is  on  the  plan  of  the  gospel.  On  the  plan  of  the  gospel  the 
motive  is  endless  misery,  proportioned  in  degree  to  the  demerit  of 
the  person  punished.  On  the  infidel  plan  it  is  a  merciful  chastise- 
ment, which  is  to  continue  no  longer  than  till  the  subject  shall 
repent.  And  as  every  sinner  will  naturally  flatter  himself,  that 
he  shall  repent  as  soon  as  he  shall  find  his  punishment  to  be  intol- 
erable ;  so  all  the  punishment,  which  on  this  plan  he  will  expect, 
is  one  that  shall  continue  but  for  a  moment,  after  it  shall  iiave 
become  extreme  or  intolerable.  And  whether  this  momentary 
extreme  punishment  be  an  equal  restraint  on  vice,  as  the  endless 
misery  threatened  in  the  gospel,  let  every  man  judge.  It  is  plain, 
that  in  a  comparative  view  it  is  as  nothing.  Therefore  as  even 
this,  the  most  plausible  scheme  of  infidelity,  cuts  the  sinews  of 
morality  and  opens  the  flood-gates  of  vice  ;  the  prevalence  of  it 
in  our  state  would  be  a  very  great  political  evil. 

If  we  take  the  pains  to  compare  Christianity  with  ancient  pa- 
ganism, we  shall  find,  that  the  former  has,  even  in  a  political 
view,  the  like  advantage  over  the  latter,  which  it  has  over  infi- 
delity. If  in  the  account,  which  I  shall  now  give  of  the  pagan 
religion,  some  things  shall  be  mentioned,  which  will  be  grating  to 
those  of  the  most  delicate  feelings  ;  I  think  I  shall  be  entitled  to 
the  pardon  of  my  hearers,  as  otherwise  it  will  be  impossible  for 
me  to  do  justice  to  this  important  subject. 

Paganism,  though  it  taught  a  future  punishment  of  wicked  men 
of  certain  descriptions ;  yet  indulged  and  even  encouraged  vice 
in  a  variety  of  ways.  It  taught  that  there  were  many  gods, 
some  male  and  some  female  ;  some  comparatively  good,  others 
exceedingly  evil ;  but  all  and  even  the  chief  god,  on  many  occa- 
sions, acting  a  most  wicked  part  and  indulging  the  vilest  lusts. 
Some  of  their  female  deities  were  deceased  women  of  most  aban- 
doned characters.  Jupiter,  whom  they  called  the  father  of  gods 
and  men,  was  himself  the  son  of  Saturn  who  according  to  some, 
was  king  of  Crete ;  according  to  others,  was  Ham,  the  son  of 
Noah  ;  according  to  others,  was  Adam  ;  but  on  every  hypothesis 
was  a  mere  man.     This  man,  the  ancient  heathens  believed,  had 

*  See  Blount  and  Tyndal. 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  191 

a  number  of  children,  and  was  wont  to  devour  them  as  soon  as 
they  were  born ;  but  Jupiter  was  saved  by  an  artifice  of  his 
mother.  He,  grown  to  maturity,  rebelled  against  his  father,  who 
till  then  was  supposed  to  be  the  supreme  God,  drove  him  from 
his  throne,  and  seized  his  authority  and  dominions.  When  Jupi- 
ter had  by  these  means  raised  himself  to  the  place  of  supreme 
deity,  he  was  wont  to  transform  himself  into  various  visible  shapes, 
to  facilitate  his  designs  of  criminal  intercourse  with  women  here 
on  earth.  Now  how  destructive  of  the  interests  of  virtue  and 
morality  must  necessarily  have  been  these  ideas  of  the  gods  ;  and 
especially  these  ideas  of  the  character  and  conduct  of  the  su- 
preme god,  Jupiter  the  greatest  and  the  best ! 

In  like  manner  destructive  to  morality  must  have  been  almost 
all  their  other  ideas  of  their  gods ;  as  of  their  animosities  and 
contentions  among  themselves  ;  of  their  intrigues  and  lusts  ;  and 
the  vicious  and  most  abominable  practices  by  which,  in  many  in- 
stances, they  were  worshipped.  The  goddess  Venus  was  openly 
worshipped  by  whoredom  ;*  and  the  feasts  called  Saturnalia  and 
Bacchanalia  were  celebrated  by  the  practice  of  every  lewdness 
and  debauchery.  The  vices  of  drunkenness  and  whoredom  in 
these  cases  were  accounted,  instead  of  moral  evils,  the  highest  acts 
of  virtue  and  piety. 

Now  as  all  these  ideas  and  practices  tended  to  a  general  de- 
pravity of  morals  ;  so  their  effects  abundantly  appeared  in  the 
vicious  lives  of  the  heathen  world. 

I  am  well  aware,  that  it  has  been  said,  that  Christianity  has  de- 
praved the  morals  of  mankind  ;  that  vice  is  far  more  predomi- 
nant among  christians,  than  ever  it  was  among  the  ancient  hea- 
thens ;  and  that  therefore  we  may  justly  conclude,  that  Chris- 
tianity is  less  subservient  to  virtue  and  a  moral  life,  than  pagan- 
ism. This  has  been  urged  as  an  argument  against  the  divine 
original  and  the  truth  of  Christianity  ;  and  may  be  urged  as  an 
argument  against  the  good  policy  of  encouraging  and  supporting 
it  in  any  state.  The  consideration  of  this  objection  then  is  per- 
tinent and  necessary  to  the  discussion  of  the  subject  now  be- 
fore us. 

In  answer  to  this  objection  I  beg  leave  to  observe  in  the  first 
place,  that  if  vice  ivere  more  predominant  in  christian  nations, 
than  it  was  among  the  heathens,  it  would  not  certainly  follow,  that 
this  increase  of  vice  is  the  effect  of  Christianity.  Christianity 
prevails  in  civilized  nations  only  ;  and  in  such  nations  there  is 

*  Every  woman  among  some  nations  was  obliged,  at  least  once  in  her 
life,  to  prostitute  herself  to  any  person,  even  the  greatest  stranger,  who 
would  accept  her  favor.     This  was  done  in  honor  to  Venus. 


192  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

much  more  opportunity  for  many  vices  and  much  more  tempta- 
tion to  them,  than  among  those  who  are  not  civihzed.  Nay,  in 
civihzed  nations  only,  is  there  a  possibility  of  the  prevalence  of 
many  vices.  In  proportion  as  civilization  is  promoted,  the  wants 
of  men  are  increased.  Their  food,  their  drink,  their  apparel 
and  the  education  of  their  children,  must  be  more  expensive,  and 
more  expense  is  in  every  respect  required  to  their  living  in  fashion 
among  their  neighbors.  And  in  proportion  to  the  increase  of  their 
wants,  the  temptation  to  covetousness,  extortion,  oppression,  de- 
ceit and  fraud,  is  increased.  Again,  in  proportion  as  civilization 
is  promoted,  the  means  of  luxury  of  every  kind  are  increased,  and 
with  the  means,  the  temptations  to  luxury  and  luxury  itself  are 
increased.  No  wonder  a  savage,  who  wishes  for  nothing  more 
than  what  he  may  take  '"i  hunting  and  fishing,  and  who  has  fur- 
nished himself  with  th  s,  does  not  steal,  rob  or  extort  his  neigh- 
bor's property  ;  no  wonder  he  attempts  not  to  obtain  it  by  false- 
hood or  fraud.  Nor  is  it  any  wonder,  that  living  on  such  a  low 
and  scanty  diet  as  he  generally  does,  he  is  very  rarely  guilty  of  a 
rape,  of  adultery  or  other  lewdness.  Nor  ought  it  to  be  matter 
of  wonder,  that  all  these  vices  are  far  more  prevalent  in  civilized 
nations,  than  among  barbarians.  But  the  prevalence  of  these 
vices  in  such  nations,  is  not  owing  to  Christianity,  but  to  civili- 
zation and  its  usual  attendants.  They  were  at  least  as  prevalent 
among  the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans,  as  they  are  among  us. 
Persecution  does  not  usually  obtain  among  heathen,  because  either 
they  have  no  religion  themselves  to  instigate  them  to  persecution  ; 
or  there  is  no  religion  different  from  their  own,  to  be  the  object  of 
their  persecution  ;  or  if  there  be  a  different  religion,  it  makes  no 
opposition  to  that  which  they  have  chosen,  and  therefore  their  re- 
ligious zeal  is  not  excited  against  it. 

This  affords  an  answer  to  an  objection  to  Christianity  much  in- 
sisted on  by  some,  that  the  heathens  do  not  persecute  ;  but  that 
christians  do  most  virulently  persecute  even  one  another ;  and 
therefore  that  Christianity  makes  men  worse  instead  of  better. 
The  answer  to  this  objection  is,  that  the  different  religious  senti- 
ments and  forms  of  worship  among  the  ancient  heathens  did  not 
in  general  oppose  each  other.  They  rather  justified  each  other, 
as  the  heathens  maintained  an  intercommunity  of  gods  and  reli- 
gions. Though  every  nation  had  its  own  gods  and  religion  ;  yet 
whenever  the  individuals  went  into  another  nation,  they  joined  in 
the  worship  of  the  gods  and  in  the  observance  of  the  rites  of  the 
nation  in  which  they  then  were.  Therefore  there  was  no  oppor- 
tunity for  persecution.  But  the  nature  of  Christianity  is  very  dif- 
ferent.    It  condemns  and  opposes  all  other  religions  as  false  and 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  193 

ruinous.  Therefore  as  it  touches  the  pride  of  those  whom  it  con- 
demns, it  provokes  opposition  and  the  persecution  of  itself,  merely 
because  it  tells  the  truth.  And  the  professors  of  Christianity  too, 
by  a  misguided  zeal,  have  been  often  led  into  the  spirit  and  prac- 
tice of  persecution. 

Now  this  persecution  of  Christianity  by  those  of  other  religions, 
is  not  the  effect  of  Christianity,  but  of  opposition  to  it ;  and  the 
persecuting  spirit  which  has  appeared  in  some  christians,  is  not 
the  effect  of  Christianity,  but  of  the  abuse  and  perversion  of  it ; 
and  for  neither  of  these  is  Christianity  itself  answerable.  The 
best  institution  in  the  world  may  be  opposed  and  persecuted  ;  and 
the  best  institution  in  the  world  may  be  abused  and  perverted. 
But  Christianity  never  gave  any  just  occasion  for  either  the  perse- 
cution or  perversion  of  itself. 

Besides,  the  charge  of  persecution  may  justly  be  retorted.  For 
no  sooner  did  Christianity  make  its  appearance  in  the  world,  than 
it  was  violently  opposed  and  virulently  persecuted,  by  those  very 
heathens,  who  in  the  objection  now  before  us  are  said  not  to  have 
been  guilty  of  persecution.  And  as  long  as  they  had  the  power 
in  their  hands,  this  opposition  was  continued  or  repeated,  under 
various  Roman  emperors,  for  ten  successive  and  bloody  persecu- 
tions, in  which  thousands  and  hundreds  of  thousands  were  mar- 
tyred in  various  ways,  the  most  malicious  and  cruel. 

Nay,  the  heathens  showed  a  disposition  to  persecute  not  only 
christians,  but  one  another,  whenever  there  was  opportunity.  No 
sooner  did  Socrates  oppose  the  religion  and  polytheism  of  his 
countrymen,  than  they  began  a  persecution  of  him,  which  ended 
in  his  death.  And  Cambyses,  the  Persian  monarch,  in  contempt 
of  the  Egyptian  god  Apis,  not  only  stabbed  him  with  his  dagger, 
but  ordered  the  priests  of  Apis  to  be  severely  whipped,  and  all 
the  inhabitants  of  Memphis  to  be  slain,  who  should  be  found  re- 
joicing on  the  occasion  of  the  appearance  of  that  god.*  These 
things  demonstrate,  that  the  ancient  heathens  did  possess  an  high 
degree  of  the  spirit  of  persecution,  and  not  only  toward  the  chris- 
tians, but  toward  one  another.  The  like  spirit  hath  been  mani- 
fested by  heathens  of  modern  times.  Passing  other  instances,  I 
shall  mention  one  which  took  place  in  our  own  country.  By  the 
exertions  of  our  ancestors,  the  first  European  settlers  of  this  coun- 
try, a  considerable  number  of  the  aborigines  were  converted  to 
the  christian  faith.  The  pagan  Indians  were  displeased  with  this, 
banished  from  their  society  all  the  converts,  and  when  they  could 
do  it  with  safety,  put  them  to  death,  and  would  have  massacred 

*  Prideaux's  Connection. 

17* 


194  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

them  all,  had  they  not  been  restrained  by  the  fear  of  our  ances- 
tors. 

The  facts  concerning  Socrates  and  Cambyses,  furnish  an  an- 
swer to  that  part  of  the  objection  under  consideration,  which 
urges  that  christians  persecute  not  only  heathens,  but  one  an- 
other ;  whereas  heathens  did  not  persecute  one  another.  It  ap- 
pears by  the  facts  just  mentioned,  that  heathens  have  persecuted 
one  another.  Besides,  the  same  reason  is  to  be  assigned  for  chris- 
tians persecuting  one  another,  as  for  the  heathens  persecuting 
christians.  The  protestants  say,  that  the  religion  of  the  papists 
is  fundamentally  wrong  ;  on  the  other  hand,  the  papists  assert 
the  same  concerning  the  protestants.  Thus  by  a  mutual  renun- 
ciation, condemnations  and  excommunications  of  each  other,  the 
false  zeal  of  these  and  other  different  sects  among  christians  is 
kindled  into  persecution,  on  the  same  grounds  on  which  persecu- 
tion is  begun  and  carried  on,  between  christians  and  heathens. 
But  by  reason  of  the  forementioned  intercommunity  of  gods  and 
religions  among  the  ancient  heathens,  these  grounds  of  persecu- 
tion did  not  exist  among  them  in  general,  though  in  some  cases 
they  did  both  exist  and  produce  their  usual  fruits. 

Let  us  now  more  directly  attend  to  the  charge  brought  against 
Christianity,  that  vice  is  more  prevalent  among  christians,  than  it 
was  among  the  ancient  heathens. 

Christians  indeed  have  no  virtue  to  be  the  ground  of  boasting ; 
on  the  other  hand  they  have  great  reason  to  be  ashamed  and 
humbled  on  account  of  their  vices  and  their  depravity  of  man- 
ners. Still  I  maintain,  that  open  vice  is  not  so  prevalent  in 
christian  nations,  as  it  was  among  the  ancient  heathens.  Let  us 
compare  those  ancient  heathens,  of  whom  we  know  the  most  and 
who  were  the  most  improved  and  polite,  with  the  christians  of 
whom  we  know  the  most ;  the  ancient  Greeks  and  Romans  with 
the  citizens  of  the  United  States. 

Here  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  we  labor  under  great  disadvan- 
tage. We  know  our  own  country  and  its  predominant  vices, 
both  public  and  private.  Li  order  to  this  we  need  but  open  our 
eyes  and  look  around  us.  We  have  not  the  same  advantage  to 
know  the  ancients.  We  are  entirely  dependent  on  history  for 
information  concerning  them  and  their  vices  ;  and  this  generally 
relates  the  public  transactions  of  nations  only,  as  their  wars  and 
treaties,  their  laws  and  public  judgments ;  but  is  mostly  si- 
lent concerning  the  morals  and  private  lives  of  individuals  or  of 
the  people  considered  collectively  ;  and  so  far  as  we  are  ignorant 
of  the  ancients  we  have  no  right  to  charge  them  with  vice.  How- 
ever, with  all  this  disadvantage,  I  fear  not  to  proceed  to  the  com- 
parison. 


Necessary  to  political  prosperity.  195 

Let  us  then  institute  the  comparison  with  respect  to  the  prin- 
cipal moral  virtues,  as  temperance,  chastity,  truth,  justice  and  hu- 
manity. 

1.  As  to  temperance;  though  this  was  reckoned  among  the 
virtues  by  the  pagan  moral  writers,  yet  it  is  plain  from  their  wri- 
ters in  general,  that  drunkenness  was  exceedingly  common  among 
them,  and  among  all  ranks,  among  magistrates,  philosophers  and 
priests,  as  well  as  others.  Their  priests  in  some  of  their  religious 
feasts  were  always  intoxicated.  Even  Cato,  though  a  Stoic  phi- 
losopher, one  of  their  strictest  moralists  and  a  principal  magis- 
trate, was  remarkably  addicted  to  this  vice.  So  was  Zeno,  the 
founder  of  the  sect  of  the  Stoics  ;  and  Chrysippus,  another  Stoic 
philosopher  died  in  consequence  of  excessive  drinking  at  a  sacri- 
fice. The  character  of  their  principal  magistrates,  priests  and 
philosophers,  does  not  appear  to  have  suffered  much,  if  at  all,  by 
this  vice.  It  must  therefore  have  been  considered  by  the  people, 
as  a  very  venial  fault,  if  any  at  all.  Indeed  this  is  evident  by  all 
their  writers.  But  how  it  is  esteemed  among  us,  and  what  would 
be  the  effect  of  it  on  the  reputation  of  our  principal  magistrates 
and  divines,  I  need  not  inform  you. 

2.  As  to  chastity,  it  is  manifest  from  the  whole  current  of  pa- 
gan writers,  that  they  considered  fornication  as  no  crime,  and 
therefore  ran  into  it  without  reserve.  Not  only  is  this  observable 
of  Homer's  heroes,  but  even  the  modest  Virgil's  pious  Eneas, 
who  was  meant  to  be  a  perfect  character,  had  an  amour  with 
Dido,  without  the  least  shame  or  sense  of  indecency.  Simple 
fornication  was  not  only  commonly  practised  without  restraint, 
but  was  allowed  by  all  their  philosophers,  and  was  positively  en- 
couraged by  some  of  them.*  Many  of  the  customs  of  the  Greeks 
and  Romans  promoted  lewdness.  The  manner  of  the  appear- 
ance of  women  in  some  of  their  public  exercises,  was  such  as  di- 
rectly tended  to  that  vice  ;  and  the  ideas  of  the  lawfulness  and 
expediency  of  a  community  of  wives  so  far  prevailed  and  had 
such  an  influence  on  practice,  as  not  only  implied  the  violation 
of  chastity,  but  had  a  most  baleful  general  tendency  with  respect 

*  "  None  of  the  philosopliers  ever  represented  simple  fornication,  espe- 
cially on  the  part  of  the  man,  as  any  vice  at  all.  Cato  commended  a  young 
man  for  frequenting  the  public  stews  ;  and  Cicero  expressly  speaks  of  it, 
as  a  thing  that  was  never  found  fault  with." — Priesth/s  Institutes.  All  that 
was  enjoined  by  Epictetus,  who  of  all  the  philosophers,  is  perha})s  the 
most  celebrated  for  his  strict  maxims  of  morality,  was,  "that  people  should 
abstain  from  fornication  before  marriage  as  far  as  they  could  ;  and  that  if 
they  did  not  abstain,  they  should  use  it  lawfully,  and  not  be  severe  in  rep- 
rehending those  who  did  not  abstain."     Enchiridion,  Chap.  47. 


196  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

to  that  virtue.*  Though  it  is  hardly  credible,  yet  unnatural  vices 
had  too  much  the  sanction  of  some  legislators  and  philosophers, 
and  were  countenanced  by  many  of  them.  Xenophon  informs 
us,  that  the  sin  of  Sodom  was  encouraged  by  the  public  laws  of 
several  of  the  states  of  Greece.  It  was  more  especially  so  among 
the  Cretans,  in  order  to  prevent  too  great  an  increase  of  the  peo- 
ple. Solon,  one  of  the  seven  wise  men  of  Greece,  and  the  cele- 
brated lawgiver  of  Athens,  forbade  this  practice  to  slaves,  which 
necessarily  conveys  the  idea  of  his  thinking  it  fit  for  free  men  only. 
According  to  Cicero,  the  Greek  philosophers  not  only  generally 
practised,  but  even  gloried  in  this  vice  ;  and  Plutarch  informs  us, 
that  many  parents  would  not  suffer  their  children  to  keep  the 
company  of  those  philosophers,  who  pretended  to  be  fond  of  them. 
Diogenes  was  remarkable  for  indulging  himself  in  the  most  abom- 
inable practices  openly,  and  without  a  sense  of  shame  ;  affecting, 
according  to  the  maxim  of  the  Cynics,  to  live  according  to  na- 
ture.f  These  unnatural  vices  were  increased  in  a  most  astonish- 
ing manner,  about  the  time  of  the  promulgation  of  Christianity. 
Seneca  says,  that  in  his  time  they  were  "  practised  openly  and 
without  shame  at  Rome."  These  accounts  given  by  heathen 
writers,  fully  justify  the  charges  thrown  out  on  this  head  against 
the  heathens,  by  the  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  especially 
by  the  apostle  Paul,  in  his  first  chapter  to  the  Romans ;  though 
to  christians  the  inspired  writers  need  no  authority,  but  do  of 
themselves  sufficiently  prove  the  amazing  depravity  of  the  heathen 
world  in  this  respect. 

3.  Truth  is  a  moral  virtue,  the  obligation  and  necessity  of 
which  are  perhaps  as  evident  as  those  of  any  virtue  whatever. 
Yet  the  Stoic  philosophers  taught  that  lying  was  lawful,  when- 
ever it  was  profitable ;  and  Plato  allowed,  that  a  man  may  lie, 
who  knows  how  to  do  it  at  a  proper  time. 

4.  Let  us  inquire  how  far  justice  was  maintained  and  prac- 

*  "  At  Sparta,  young  women  appeared  naked  in  the  public  exercises ; 
and  when  married  women  had  no  children,  their  husbands  were  encour- 
aged to  consent  to  a  free  intercourse  between  them  and  other  men  ;  a  cus- 
tom which  Plutarch  vindicates.  This  was  also  agreeable  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  Stoics ;  and  it  is  well  known,  that  that  rigid  Stoic,  Cato  of  Utica, 
consented  to  such  an  intercourse  between  his  own  wife  and  his  friend 
Hortensius.  Plato  in  his  book  of  laws,  recommends  a  community  of  wo- 
men ;  and  he  advises  that  soldiers  be  not  restrained  with  respect  to  any 
kind  of  sinful  indulgence,  even  the  most  unnatural  species  of  it,  when  they 
are  on  an  expedition. — Priestly. 

t  Does  not  the  forementioned  deistic  maxim  of  following  nature,  directly 
lead  to  the  same  abominable  practices  ? 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  197 

tised  among  the  ancients.  I  now  mean  justice  in  matters  of 
property.  For  that  kind  of  justice  which  is  opposed  to  oppres- 
sion and  cruelty  will  come  into  view,  when  we  shall  consider  the 
humanity  of  the  ancients.  It  is  well  known  to  have  been  a  max- 
im at  Sparta,  that  probity  and  everything  else  was  to  be  sacri- 
ficed to  the  good  of  the  state.  Tiie  Spartans  encouraged  their 
children  to  steal,  but  punished  those  who  were  taken  in  the  act, 
as  not  being  dexterous  in  the  business.  "  We  may  judge  of  the 
state  of  Greece,  with  respect  to  the  kind  of  justice  of  which  we 
are  now  speaking,  from  that  passage  in  a  dialogue  of  Xenophon, 
in  which  he  himiorously  shows  the  advantages  of  poverty  and 
the  incoveniences  of  riches  ;  and  by  what  Tacitus  says,  that 
the  temples  were  full  of  debtors  and  criminals,  as  churches  and 
monasteries  used  formerly  to  be  in  Popish  countries.  Rome  and 
the  neighborhood  of  it,  in  the  most  interesting  period  of  its  his- 
tory, viz.  in  the  time  of  Cicero,  abounded  with  robbers.  Sallust 
says,  that  Cataline's  army  was  much  augmented  by  the  accession 
of  highwaymen  about  Rome.  Cicero  observed,  that  had  Milo 
killed  Clodius  by  night,  it  might  have  been  imagined,  that  he  had 
been  killed  by  highwaymen,  and  that  the  frequency  of  such  ac- 
cidents would  have  favored  the  supposition,  though  he  had  with 
him  thirty  slaves  completely  armed  and  accustomed  to  blood  and 
danger.  By  the  law  of  the  twelve  tables,  possession  for  two  years 
formed  a  prescription  for  land,  and  of  one  year  for  movables  ; 
an  evident  mark  of  frequent  violences,  when  such  a  law  was  ne- 
cessary to  secure  a  title  to  property."*  How  different  our  situ- 
ation is  from  this,  and  how  much  more  secure  our  persons  and 
property  are,  I  need  not  mention  in  this  auditory. 

5.  We  proceed  now  to  inquire  how  far  the  ancient  heathens 
practised  the  duties  of  humanity,  and  how  far  they  violated  those 
duties  by  outrage,  oppression  and  cruelty.  The  Stoics  condem- 
ned all  compassion.  No  wonder  then  that  they  imbibed  and 
practised  inhumanity.  Some  philosophers,  particularly  Demo- 
critus  recommended  revenge  ;  and  Plato  owns  that  forgiveness  of 
injuries  was  contrary  to  the  general  doctrine  of  the  philosophers. 
These  ideas  seem  perfectly  to  coincide  with  those  among  the 
moderns,  who  are  the  great  advocates  for  a  sense  of  honor.  And 
how  far  these  ideas  are  consistent  with  scripture,  with  reason  or 
with  humanity,  I  leave  you  to  judge. 

It  was  common  with  the  Romans  to  make  war  on  other  na- 
tions for  the  end  of  enlarging  their  own  dominions,  and  aggran- 
dizing their  empire.  Generally  they  had  no  better  motive  to 
their  wars  than  this.     But  what  is   such  a  war,  but  a  complica- 

*  Priestley's  letters  on  general  policy. 


198  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

tion  of  downright  robbery,  cruelty  and  murder  ?  They  practised 
equal  injustice  in  the  manner  in  which  they  carried  on  their 
wars.  They  enslaved  their  captives  or  put  them  to  death  in  cold 
blood,  as  they  pleased.  Their  triumphs  were  most  oppressive 
and  cruel.  The  conquered  kings  and  generals,  loaded  with 
chains,  were  driven  into  the  city,  and  to  the  capitol  before  their 
conquerors,  and  were  followed  by  mimicks  and  buffoons,  who  in- 
sulted over  their  misfortunes.  When  they  arrived  at  the  forum, 
they  were  led  back  to  prison  and  there  strangled  ;  and  this  under 
the  pretence  of  taking  full  revenge  of  their  enemies.  What  bet- 
ter is  this,  than  the  treatment  which  our  savage  Indians  give  their 
captives  ? 

The  treatment  which  they  gave  those  captives  whose  lives 
they  spared,  was  correspondent  to  this  cruelty  toward  those 
whom  they  put  to  death.  As  has  been  observed,  they  absolutely 
enslaved  them  ;  and  by  law,  slaves  were  considered  not  as  men, 
but  as  mere  things,  the  mere  property  of  their  masters,  and  were 
treated,  punished,  and  put  to  death  at  any  time  and  in  any  man- 
ner, as  their  masters  pleased,  whether  by  beating,  starving,  tor- 
ture, or  otherwise.  "  The  Spartans  having  conquered  a  neigh- 
boring nation,  the  Helots,  enslaved  them,  frequently  butchered 
them  in  cold  blood,  and  applauded  their  youths,  when  they  killed 
them  by  surprise."  "  The  Romans  were  not  ashamed  to  suffer 
their  old  and  useless  slaves,  when  worn  out  in  their  service,  to 
starve  on  an  island  in  the  Tyber,  as  was  their  common  practice. 
Vidius  Pollio  used  to  throw  his  slaves,  who  had  disobliged  him, 
into  his  fish  ponds,  to  be  preyed  upon  by  his  mullets."  And 
though  to  our  shame,  to  the  shame  of  humanity  and  the  scandal 
of  Christianity,  a  slavery  and  a  treatment  of  slaves  similar  to  what 
existed  among  the  Romans,  exist  and  are  tolerated  in  some  parts 
of  America  ;  yet  this  scandal  cannot  be  thrown  on  Christendom 
in  general.  Such  a  slavery  did  indeed  once  generally  obtain  in 
Europe  ;  but  the  benevolent  and  humane  spirit  of  the  gospel  and 
the  principles  of  justice  taught  there,  have  long  since  generally 
abolished  it  from  that  quarter  of  the  world. 

The  proscriptions  and  assassinations,  which  were  so  common 
among  the  ancients,  are  a  further  proof  of  their  injustice,  vio- 
lence and  inhumanity.  It  is  well  known  that  during  the  con- 
tests of  Marius  and  Sylla,  and  during  the  triumvirate  of  Octavia- 
nus,  Anthony  and  Lepidus,  nothing  was  more  common  than  to 
advertise  a  certain  price  for  any  man's  or  any  number  of  men's 
heads  ;  which  was  no  other  than  hiring  any  cut-throat,  and  even 
a  man's  own  domestics,  to  murder  him  and  bring  in  his  head. 
In  this  way  the  best  men  of  Rome  were  murdered,  and  among 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  199 

the  rest,  Cicero  the  great  orator,  philosopher  and  ornament  of 
Rome.  Amidst  all  the  vices  justly  imputable  to  christians,  they 
are  not  guilty  of  such  barbarity  and  outrage  as  this.  Such  is  the 
salutary  influence  of  Christianity,  that  even  kings,  who  among 
the  ancients  no  sooner  fell  into  the  hands  of  their  rivals  or  oppo- 
sers,  than  they  were  assassinated,  are  now  not  put  to  death  with- 
out a  formal  trial ;  which  is  a  clear  demonstration  among  many 
others,  of  our  improvement  in  civilization  and  humanity,  beyond 
anything  which  existed  among  the  most  enlightened  heathens. 

Another  instance  of  the  barbarity  and  inhumanity  of  the  an- 
cients, is  their  treatment  of  their  children.  "  The  ancient  Roman 
laws  gave  the  father  a  power  of  life  and  death  over  his  children, 
upon  this  principle,  that  he  who  gave,  had  also  the  power  to  take 
away.  And  a  son  could  not  acquire  any  property  of  his  own  du- 
ring the  life  of  his  father ;  but  all  his  acquisitions  belonged  to  his 
father,  or  at  least  the  profits,  for  life."*  Thus  children,  during 
the  life  of  their  fathers,  were  perfect  slaves,  and  in  a  worse  con- 
dition than  the  slaves  in  this  state  ;  for  the  master  in  this  state 
has  not  the  power  of  life  and  death  over  his  slaves.  Nor  were 
these  mere  speculations  of  the  Romans  ;  but  their  practice  was 
correspondent.  Hence  the  custom  of  exposing  children  ;  that  is, 
of  laying  them,  as  soon  as  born,  in  the  streets,  on  the  banks  of 
rivers,  or  in  other  frequented  places,  and  unless  some  compas- 
sionate person  should  take  them  up  and  provide  for  them,  leav- 
ing them  there  to  perish  and  to  be  devoured  by  dogs.  The  mo- 
tive to  this  horrid  practice  was,  that  the  parents  might  be  free 
from  the  trouble  and  expense  of  their  education.  Both  Plato  and 
Aristotle  say,  that  there  should  be  laws  to  prevent  the  education 
of  weak  children.  Accordingly  among  the  other  Greeks,  beside 
the  Thebans,  when  a  child  was  born,  it  was  laid  on  the  ground, 
and  if  the  father  designed  to  educate  it,  he  immediately  took  it 
up.  But  if  he  forebore  to  do  this,  the  child  was  carried  away 
and  exposed.  The  Lacedemonians  indeed  had  a  different  cus- 
tom ;  for  with  them  all  new  born  children  were  brought  before 
certain  triers,  who  w^ere  some  of  the  gravest  men  in  their  own 
tribes,  by  whom  the  infants  were  carefully  viewed  ;  and  if  they 
were  found  lusty  and  well  favored,  they  gave  orders  for  their  ed- 
ucation ;  but  if  weakly  and  deformed,  they  ordered  them  to  be 
cast  into  a  deep  cavern  in  the  earth,  near  the  mountain  Taygetus, 
as  thinking  it  neither  for  the  good  of  the  children  nor  for  the  pub- 
lic interest,  that  defective  children  should  be  brought  up.  It  was 
the  unhappy  fate  of  daughters  especially  to  be  thus  treated,  as  re- 

*  Blackstone. 


200  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

quiring  more  charges  to  educate  and  settle  them  in  the  world  than 
sons. 

In  several  nations,  not  only  infants,  but  also  the  aged  and  the 
infirm,  were  exposed  and  left  to  perish. 

Another  horrid  inhumanity,  prevalent  among  the  ancient  hea- 
thens, was  the  practice  of  sacrificing  captives  and  slaves  at  the 
funerals  of  the  dead.  Thus  Achilles  sacrificed  twelve  young  Tro- 
jans to  the  manes  of  Patroclus  ;  and  Eneas  sent  captives  to  Evan- 
der,  to  be  sacrificed  at  the  funeral  of  Pallas.  This  was  first  prac- 
tised M'ith  respect  to  persons  of  great  eminence  only,  but  at  length 
it  was  done  at  the  funerals  of  all  persons  of  property,  and  became 
a  necessary  part  of  the  ceremony. 

Another  practice  as  horrid  as  any  I  have  mentioned,  was  that 
of  exhibiting  gladiators,  trained  to  fencing  and  the  use  of  the  sword, 
spear,  etc.,  on  purpose  that  they  might  fight  and  kill  one  another 
on  the  stage,  for  the  mere  entertainment  of  the  spectators,  as 
some  people  now  bait  bulls  and  set  dogs  to  fighting.  "  These 
poor  wretches  were  made  to  swear  they  would  fight  unto  death  ; 
and  if  they  failed  of  this,  they  were  put  to  death  by  fire  or  sword, 
clubs,  whips,  or  the  like."*  "  Those  who  have  not  attended  to 
history,  are  apt  to  imagine,  that  the  exhibition  of  gladiators  was 
a  rare  thing,  and  that  when  it  happened,  a  few  pairs  only  were 
engaged.  But  it  was  far  otherwise.  Under  the  Roman  empe- 
rors this  inhuman  entertainment  cost  innumerable  lives.  Caesar 
when  Edile,  gave  three  hundred  and  twenty  gladiators.  Gordian 
in  the  time  of  his  Edileship,  exhibited  twelve  entertainments,  that 
is,  one  in  each  month.  In  some  of  these  were  five  hundred  cham- 
pions, and  in  none  of  them  less  than  one  hundred  and  fifty. 
Taking  it  at  a  medium,  he  must  have  exhibited  at  the  very  least, 
three  thousand.  Titus  exhibited  these  cruel  shows  for  an  hun- 
dred days  together.  The  good  and  moderate  Trajan  continued 
these  spectacles  for  an  hundred  and  twenty-three  days  ;  and  in 
that  time  gave  ten  thousand.  When  we  consider  how  many  dif- 
ferent ranks  of  people  gave  these  entertainments,  Ediles,  Pretors, 
Questors,  Consuls,  Emperors  and  Priests,  besides  private  persons 
at  funerals  (which  became  so  common  a  practice,  that  it  was  an 
article  in  a  last  will)  we  must  be  convinced,  that  the  numbers 
were  vast.  What  adds  to  the  inhumanity  of  this  custom,  is,  that 
it  was  designed  for  a  gay  entertainment  and  was  attended  as  such. 
This  horrible  custom  grew  to  such  an  extravagance,  that  it  was 
found  necessary  to  moderate  it  by  law,  in  the  time  of  the  heathen 
Emperors.     Constantino  first  prohibited  it  altogether.     But  so 

*  Chamber's  Dictionary. 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  201 

violent  was  the  taste  for  it,  that  it  crept  in  again.     The  Emperor 
Honorius  entirely  suppressed  it." 

I  shall  take  notice  of  only  one  more  vice  of  the  ancient  hea- 
thens, that  is  suicide.  This  was  recommended  by  many  philoso- 
phers, as  an  heroic  act  of  virtue,  and  was  practised  by  some  of 
the  highest  fame,  as  by  Zeno  the  founder  of  the  sect  of  the  Stoics, 
by  Cato  of  Utica,  and  by  Brutus.  No  wonder  if  under  such  in- 
structors and  such  examples,  suicide  was  very  common  among 
the  ancients.  Beside  the  wickedness  of  this  in  the  sight  of  God, 
the  ruinous  tendency  of  it  in  a  political  view  is  manifest  on  the 
slightest  reflection.  By  this  one  vice  not  only  any  man  may  de- 
prive the  state  of  his  aid  and  throw  his  family  and  dependents  on 
the  public ;  but  the  most  important  citizens,  by  throwing  away 
their  own  lives  in  the  most  important  and  critical  moment,  may 
greatly  endanger  and  entirely  overthrow  the  commonwealth. 
What  if  our  Washington,  or  the  most  wise  and  influential  mem- 
bers of  our  Congress,  had  destroyed  themselves  in  the  most  crit- 
ical periods  of  the  late  war  ? 

From  this  brief  survey  of  the  vices  of  the  ancient  heathens,  I 
leave  my  hearers  to  judge  how  well  founded  the  objection  against 
Christianity  is,  that  it  has  depraved  the  morals  of  mankind. 

I  have  now  finished  the  observations  which  I  intended,  on  the 
subject  proposed,  which  was,  The  necessity  of  a  belief  of  Chris- 
tianity by  the  citizens  of  this  state,  in  order  to  our  public  and  po- 
litical prosperity.  In  subserviency  to  this  general  design  I  have 
endeavored  to  show,  that  some  religion  is  necessary  to  our  politi- 
cal prosperity  ;  that  no  other  religion  than  the  christian,  can  be 
generally  received  and  established  in  this  country ;  and  that  if 
some  other  religion  could  be  established  among  us,  it  would  by 
no  means  be  so  useful  in  a  political  view,  as  the  christian.  I  have 
endeavored  to  illustrate  the  last  observation  by  a  comparison  of 
Christianity  with  the  philosophical  religion  of  infidelity  and  with 
ancient  paganism.  I  now  beg  leave  to  make  two  or  three  infer- 
ences from  what  has  been  said. 

1.  If  Christianity  be  more  useful  than  any  other  religion,  even 
for  political  purposes,  we  may  presume  that  it  is  still  more  use- 
ful for  the  other  purposes,  which  are  indeed  its  immediate  objects, 
piety  and  true  virtue,  and  peace  and  comfort  in  them.  The 
great  foundations  of  religion  and  virtue  are,  the  moral  perfections 
of  God,  his  moral  government,  the  rule  of  our  duty,  a  future  state 
of  retribution,  the  possibility  of  pardon  and  the  end  of  our  crea- 
tion. Let  us  in  these  several  particulars  compare  Christianity  with 
the  philosophical  religion,  which  is  the  only  rival  of  Christianity 
with  any  among  us. 

Vol.  II.  18 


202  BELIEF   OF   CHRISTIANITY 

(1)  As  to  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  Christianity  certainly 
teaches  them  more  clearly  than  they  can  be  learnt  from  any  light 
aflbrded  by  the  philosophical  religion.  The  scriptures  assure  us, 
that  ''  holy,  holy,  holy  is  the  Lord  of  hosts  ;"  that  he  is  "  a  God 
of  truth  and  without  iniquity,  just  and  right  is  he  ;"  that  he  is 
"  the  Lord,  the  Lord  God  merciful  and  gracious,  long  suffering, 
and  abiHidant  in  goodness  and  truth,  keeping  mercy  for  thou- 
sands, forgiving  iniquity  and  transgression  and  sin,  and  that  will 
by  no  means  clear  the  guilty."  Yea,  they  assure  us,  that  "  God 
is  love."  They  clear  up  the  difficulty  arising  from  the  evil  in  the 
world,  by  informing  us  of  the  end  of  all  things,  and  that  alt 
things  shall  finally  be  overruled  for  good.  But  the  philosophical 
religion  gives  no  clear  evidence  at  all  of  the  moral  perfections  of 
God.  This  is  acknowledged  by  some  of  the  principal  writers  on 
that  system.  Hume,  the  most  acute  of  all  infidels,  says  we  ought 
to  infer  from  the  works  of  God,  intermixed  as  they  are  with  good 
and  evil,  that  God  is  of  a  mixed  character,  partly  good  and  part- 
ly evil.  Also  Lord  Bolingbroke,  another  principal  deistical  wri- 
ter, holds,  that  there  is  no  evidence  of  the  moral  perfections  of 
God. 

(2)  The  like  advantage  have  we  by  the  scriptures  as  to  the 
evidence  of  the  reality  and  nature  of  the  moral  government  of 
God.  On  the  pretence  that  we  are  under  the  influence  of  a  ne- 
cessity of  coercion,  it  is  denied  by  some  infidels  that  we  are 
moral  agents  and  that  we  are  capable  of  either  virtue  or  vice. 
Now  not  only  is  this  matter  cleared  up  by  revelation,  but  it  is  to 
be  observed,  that  to  be  consistent,  such  infidels  ought  also  to  de- 
ny, that  we  are  capable  of  any  crime  in  civil  society. 

If  we  be  not  moral  agents,  we  are  no  more  capable  of  murder, 
than  a  stock  or  a  stone  ;  and  a  man  who  from  malice  prepense 
kills  another,  no  more  deserves  punishment,  than  the  stone  or  the 
tree,  which  falls  on  a  man  and  crushes  him  to  death  ;  and  the 
man  who  from  a  wish  to  introduce  and  establish  arbitrary  gov- 
ernment in  his  country,  now  a  free  and  happy  republic,  betrays- 
its  ships  and  fortresses,  no  more  deserves  punishment,  than  the 
tempests  which  sink  the  former,  or  the  fire  which  consumes  the 
latter. 

Some  deny,  that  God  at  all  concerns  himself  with  human  af- 
fairs or  actions.  But  this  is  not  only  not  reconcilable  with  the 
scriptures,  but  not  with  the  moral  perfections  of  God.  If  we  be 
capable  of  virtue,  and  yet  he  neglect  us,  so  as  not  to  set  before 
us  proper  motives  to  it,  and  not  to  show  by  proper  rewards  and 
punishments  his  approbation  of  the  virtuous,  and  disapprobation 
of  the  vicious ;  this  cannot  be  reconciled  with  his  moral  perfec- 
tion. 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  203 

It  is  further  urged,  that  we  are  not  in  any  case  punishable,  as 
all  things  are  right,  or  as  the  poet  expresses  it,  whatever  is,  is 
right.  If  by  this  observation  be  meant,  that  things  are  by  the 
all-wise  and  all-governing  providence  of  God,  overruled  to  an- 
swer a  good  purpose,  though  in  many  instances  directly  contrary 
to  their  natural  tendency  ;  this  is  granted.  But  if  it  be  meant, 
that  all  things  in  their  own  nature  tend  to  good,  this  is  not  true. 
Malice  has  no  natural  tendency  to  good  but  a  natural  tendency  to 
evil.  On  the  other  hand,  benevolence  has  a  natural  tendency  to 
good.  Nor  will  it  be  pretended,  that  if  malice  reigned  through 
the  universe,  the  universe  would  be  as  happy,  as  if  benevolence 
universally  reigned.  It  is  the  natural  tendency  of  a  rational  ac- 
tion, which  determines  its  moral  quality,  and  not  the  consequence 
produced  by  Almighty  God,  contrary  to  its  natural  tendency. 

If  all  human  actions  were  in  a  moral  view  indifferent,  we 
should  no  more  deserve  punishment  for  murder,  than  we  should 
for  saving  our  country  from  ruin. 

This  scheme  shuts  all  moral  good  out  of  the  universe,  as  well 
as  all  moral  evil.  For  if  all  the  tempers  and  actions  of  men,  are 
as  to  morality  alike,  it  must  be  because  there  is  no  morality  in 
any  of  thern.  If  there  be  moral  good  in  any  of  those  tempers  or 
actions,  there  must  be  moral  evil  in  the  directly  opposite  ;  and  if 
there  be  no  moral  evil  in  the  latter,  there  is  no  moral  good  in  the 
former  ;  as  if  there  were  no  natural  evil  in  pain  there  would  be 
no  natural  good  in  pleasure. 

But  while  infidels  confound  themselves  and  the  principles  of 
reason,  in  their  discourses  concerning  the  moral  government  of 
God  ;  the  scriptures  assure  us  of  the  reality  of  that  government, 
and  of  our  accountableness  to  God. 

(3)  TJie  scriptures  give  us  a  plain  and  excellent  rule  of  duty, 
pointing  out  our  duty  not  only  in  general,  but  in  all  the  most  im- 
portant particulars.  How  extremely  deficient  in  this  instance 
also,  is  the  philosophical  religion  !  It  is  indeed  said,  that  the 
rule  of  our  duty  is  right  reason  and  the  law  of  nature,  and  that 
virtue  is  a  conformity  to  them.  But  this  is  saying  no  more  than 
that  virtue  is  virtue,  and  that  the  rule  of  our  duty  is  the  rule  of 
our  duty.  For  right  reason  in  this  case  means  what  is  reasonable 
and  right  in  a  moral  sense  ;  and  duty  and  what  is  right  in  a  moral 
sense  are  the  same  thing  ;  and  it  is  just  as  difficult  to  find  out  the 
law  of  reason  and  of  nature,  as  to  find  out  our  duty. 

(4)  The  scriptures  give  us  the  most  positive  assurance  of  a  future 
state.  But  the  philosophical  religion  can  never  assure  us  of  this, 
because  it  cannot  assure  us  of  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  by 
which  alone  he  is  disposed  to  reward  the  righteous  and  punish 


204  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

the  wicked.  Therefore  infidels  are  greatly  divided  among  them- 
selves on  this  subject.  Some  as  was  before  observed  believe  a 
future  state,  some  disbelieve  it.  Those  who  believe  such  a  state, 
believe  that  God  made  all  men  for  their  own  personal  happiness, 
and  that  therefore  he  will  make  them  all  happy  in  the  future 
world.  But  all  this  depends  on  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  of 
which  they,  as  their  principal  writers  confess,  have  no  evidence. 
And  if  there  be  no  evidence  of  God's  moral  perfections,  there  is 
no  evidence,  that  he  designs  the  happiness  of  his  creatures  either 
here  or  hereafter  ;  nor  is  there  any  evidence  but  that  he  designs 
the  final  misery  of  all  his  creatures.  Or  if  infidels  had  evidence 
of  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  they  would  not  have  evidence, 
that  God  made  every  man  for  the  end  of  his  personal  happiness. 
The  perfect  goodness  of  God  doubtless  implies,  that  he  made  all 
things  with  a  design  to  promote  good  on  the  whole  or  on  the  large 
scale.  So  that  taking  the  system  of  intelligent  creatures  together, 
there  shall  be  the  greatest  possible  happiness  in  it.  But  this  does 
not  imply,  that  every  individual  creature  shall  be  completely  hap- 
py. There  is  no  accounting  for  the  calamities  and  sufferings  of 
this  life  on  any  other  supposition,  than  that  they  will  all  finally 
issue  in  the  greatest  happiness  of  the  system  ;  and  to  suppose  that 
they  conduce  to  the  good  of  the  system,  by  making  the  persons 
themselves  who  suffer  them  here,  more  happy  hereafter,  is  a 
mere  conjecture  unsupported  by  any  argument.  Therefore  to  in- 
dulge it  and  to  build  upon  it,  is  altogether  unreasonable  and  un- 
philosophical. 

On  the  whole,  there  is  no  evidence  but  that  the  good  of  the 
general  system  may  be  promoted  by  the  exemplary  punishment 
of  the  wicked  in  the  future  world.  And  if  it  would  be  promoted 
by  such  a  punishment,  infinite  goodness  not  only  admits  of  it, 
but  requires  and  demands  it. 

(5)  The  scriptures  assure  us  of  a  way  of  pardon  and  accept- 
ance with  God;  but  the  philosophical  religion  gives  no  such  as- 
surance. Infidels  do  indeed  expect  to  be  pardoned  on  their  bare 
repentance.  But  the  expectation  of  jmrdon  on  repentance,  im- 
plies an  acknowledgement,  that  they  deserve  punishment  even 
though  they  repent,  and  that  such  punishment  would  be  just ; 
otherwise  there  could  be  no  pardon  in  the  case.  To  pardon  is 
to  exempt  from  punishment  not  an  innocent  man,  but  a  guilty 
one  ;  and  to  pardon  a  penitent  implies  that  he  deserves  punish- 
ment, and  that  his  punishment  would  be  just.  But  if  the  pun- 
ishment of  the  penitent  would  be  just,  the  interest  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  the  great  community  against  which  he  has  sinned,  re- 
quires his  punishment.     The  very  idea  of  a  just  punishment  is 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  205 

of  one  which,  (there  being  no  atonement  or  substitution,)  is  due 
to  the  community  or  to  the  pubhc  good  of  the  community,  against 
which  the  crime  punished  was  committed.  But  if  the  pubUc 
good  of  God's  kingdom,  which  is  the  universe,  require  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner,  it  is  not  consistent  with  divine  goodness  to 
pardon  him.  What  ground  then  has  the  infidel  to  expect  par- 
don, when  both  justice  and  goodness  require  his  punishment? 

(6)  Christianity  informs  us  of  the  end  of  our  creation.  It  is 
generally  holden  by  infidels,  as  was  before  observed,  that  we  were 
made  for  our  own  personal  happiness.  But  if  this  were  true,  it 
would  prove,  that  God  does  concern  himself  with  human  actions, 
and  that  he  aims  to  prevent  those  which  tend  to  our  destruction. 
It  would  also  prove,  that  those  rational  actions  which  tend  to  de- 
stroy our  happiness,  are  morally  evil,  and  that  all  actions  are  not 
in  the  same  sense  right.  The  evidence  that  God  created  us  for 
our  own  happiness,  must  depend  on  the  evidence  of  God's  moral 
perfections.  But  as  has  been  observed,  the  infidel  has  no  evi- 
dence of  these.  Besides,  if  God  really  created  us  all  for  the  end 
of  our  own  personal  happiness,  it  seems  that  he  has  in  this  world 
obtained  his  end,  in  a  very  imperfect  degree  only ;  and  on  the 
plan  of  infidelity  there  is  no  evidence  of  a  future  state.  There- 
fore on  that  plan  there  is  no  evidence,  that  God  will  ever  obtain 
his  end  in  our  creation.  Or  if  infidels  should  grant,  that  we  were 
made  for  the  general  good  of  the  system  of  intelligences,  this 
would  be  to  give  up  the  chief  object  of  infidelity ;  because  the 
general  good  may  admit  of  our  misery  in  the  future  world,  as  it 
does  of  our  misery  in  this. 

But  Christianity  clearly  informs  us,  that  God  made  all  things 
for  his  glory,  implying  the  greatest  happiness  and  perfection  of 
the  creation  as  a  system  ;  or  for  the  glorious  exercise  and  display 
of  his  power,  wisdom  and  goodness  in  raising  his  kingdom,  which 
is  the  creation,  as  a  system,  to  the  highest  degree  of  perfection 
and  happiness. 

Thus  we  see  in  what  darkness,  as  to  the  most  essential  princi- 
ples of  religion,  we  should  have  been  involved,  had  we  not  been 
favored  with  the  light  of  divine  revelation,  and  in  what  darkness 
they  are  involved,  who  embrace  the  philosophical  religion  of  in- 
fidelity. And  thus  we  have  further  proof  how  happy  that  people 
is,  whose  God  is  the  Lord,  not  only  as  this  circumstance  lays  a 
foundation  for  their  political  good,  but  especially  as  it  lays  a 
foundation  for  true  virtue  and  piety,  for  peace  and  comfort  here 
and  eternal  happiness  in  the  favor  of  God  hereafter. 

2.  A  second  inference  from  this  subject  is,  that  since  Chris- 
tianity appears  to  be  necessary  to  the  public  good  of  the  state,  it 

18* 


206  BELIEF   OF  CHRISTIANITY 

ought  to  be  encouraged  by  magistrates  and  rulers  of  every  descrip- 
tion. They  are  appointed  to  be  the  guardians  of  the  public  good  ; 
of  course  it  is  their  duty  to  protect  and  promote  everything  tend- 
ing to  it,  and  especially  everything  necessary  to  it.  Therefore  as 
Christianity  is  necessary  to  the  public  good,  they  are  bound  to  en- 
courage, promote  and  inculcate  that,  by  their  example  and  pro- 
fession, by  speaking  and  acting  in  favor  of  it  both  in  public  and 
private,  by  supporting  christian  ordinances  and  worship,  and  by 
promoting  to  places  of  trust  and  profit  those  who  profess  it  and 
live  agreeably,  and  who  are  otherwise  properly  qualified.  Magis- 
trates are  called  to  do  all  this  on  the  ground  of  the  soundest  policy. 

3.  For  the  same  reasons  the  citizens  in  general  are  obligated 
to  encourage  and  promote  Christianity,  by  being  themselves  chris- 
tians and  that  not  only  in  profession,  but  in  heart  and  life,  and  by 
giving  their  suffrages  for  those  who  are  of  the  same  character. 
It  is  indeed  to  be  confessed,  that  not  all  professed  christians  are 
good  men  or  real  christians  ;  yet  among  professed  christians  are 
many  men,  who  possess  good  abilities  and  a  proper  share  of  infor- 
mation, who  are  strictly  moral  and  upright,  and  who  expect  to 
give  an  account  of  their  conduct  to  God.  Such  are  the  men  to 
be  promoted  in  the  state  ;  and  the  citizens  by  promoting  such 
men,  will  encourage  and  promote  Christianity,  and  at  the  same 
time  promote  the  good  of  the  state. 

I  would  ask  the  further  patience  of  the  auditory,  while  I  close 
the  discourse,  with  the  addresses  usual  on  this  occasion. 

In  the  first  place  I  beg  leave  to  address  myself  to  His  Excel- 
lency the  Governor. 

May  it  please  your  Excellency, — In  obedience  to  your 
command  I  appear  in  the  desk  this  day  ;  and  I  could  think  of  no 
subject  more  important  and  at  the  same  time  more  suitable  to 
the  present  occasion,  than  the  happiness  of  that  people  whose 
God  is  the  Lord.  I  have  therefore  endeavored  to  illustrate  the 
necessity  of  the  christian  faith  and  practice,  to  the  prosperity  of 
the  state.  I  may  appeal  to  your  Excellency  how  far  this  faith 
and  practice  have  hitherto  contributed  to  our  political  prosperity. 
Had  not  our  ancestors  been  firm  and  exemplary  in  this  faith  and 
practice ;  had  they  not  taken  pains  to  hand  them  down  to  us ; 
had  they  not  in  all  their  towns  and  settlements  instituted  schools, 
in  which  the  principles  of  Christianity,  as  well  as  other  things 
were  taught ;  had  they  not  provided  for  the  support  of  public 
worship,  for  the  due  observance  of  the  Lord's  day,  and  for  the 
public  teaching  of  Christianity  on  that  day  ;  had  they  not  pro- 
vided for  the  support  of  a  studious  and  learned  ministry,  who 
being  themselves  men  of  knowledge,  should  be  able  to  instruct 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  207 

Others  ;  I  appeal  to  your  Excellency,  whether  our  political  affairs 
would  not  at  present  have  worn  a  very  different  aspect.  And  if 
our  supreme  magistrates  had  not  been,  both  by  profession  and 
apparent  practice,  christians,  it  would  doubtless  have  had  a  very 
baleful  influence  on  the  christian  and  moral  character  of  the  peo- 
ple at  large,  and  consequently  on  our  political  prosperity.  But  we 
are  happy  in  that  we  have  had  from  the  beginning,  even  to  the 
present  day,  a  series  of  Governors,  who  have  been  not  only  an 
honor  to  the  state,  but  ornaments  to  our  churches.  May  such  a 
series  be  still  kept  up  without  interruption.  This,  as  it  will  be  a 
proof  of  our  christian  character,  will  also  be  a  proof  of  our  public 
prosperity  in  every  successive  period,  and  a  pledge  of  our  subse- 
quent prosperity.  May  God  grant,  that  your  Excellency  shall 
effectually  contribute  to  this  prosperity  in  every  way,  in  which 
your  eminent  situation  affords  opportunity.  And  when  earthly 
states  and  empires  shall  be  no  more,  may  your  Excellency,  in  that 
series  of  excellent  men  and  excellent  Governors,  and  among  all 
real  christians,  "  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  kingdom  of  your 
Father." 

The  discourse  also  addresses  itself  to  his  Honor  the  Lieuten- 
ant Governor,  to  the  Legislative  Council  of  the  state,  and  to  the 
Representatives  of  the  towns  in  General  Assembly. 

Honorable  Legislators, — Since  the  belief  and  practice  of 
Christianity  are  so  necessary  to  the  political  good  of  our  state, 
and  since  you  are  appointed  to  be  the  guardians  of  our  political 
good,  I  thought  it  not  impertinent  to  suggest  to  you  some  impor- 
tant means,  by  which  you  may  obtain  the  end  for  which  you  are 
appointed.  Opposition  to  Christianity  both  in  faith  and  practice 
was  never,  at  least  in  our  country,  so  great  and  so  increasing,  as 
at  the  present  day.  It  lies  with  you,  gentlemen,  by  a  steady  be- 
lief, profession  and  practice  of  Christianity  ;  by  your  conversation 
and  weight ;  by  the  appointments  which  you  shall  make  to  the 
various  offices,  civil  and  military,  and  by  all  your  public  proceed- 
ings, to  withstand  this  opposition,  and  to  guard  against  the  dan- 
ger to  the  public  good,  arising  from  the  depravity  of  manners 
which  opposition  to  Christianity  naturally  induces.  It  is  your  pro- 
vince, in  conjunction  with  his  Excellency  the  Governor,  to  ap- 
point all  our  executive  civil  authority  and  to  confer  the  highest 
military  honors.  When  men  of  licentious  principles  and  prac- 
tice are  promoted  either  in  the  civil  or  military  line,  it  gives  a 
dignity  and  an  influence  to  vice  and  irreligion.  And  "one  sin- 
ner destroys  much  good,"  especially  when  exalted  to  a  high  sta- 
tion of  honor  and  authority.  Now,  if  you  give  this  advantage  to 
vice,  you  will  thereby  injure  the  state  ;  but  more  immediately 


208  BELIEF  OF  CHRISTIANITY 

you  will  injure  religion  and  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  And  let  me 
beseech  you  to  remember,  that  you  also  have  a  master  in  heaven, 
to  whom  you,  as  well  as  the  rest  of  men,  must  give  an  account. 
The  only  way  to  gain  his  approbation  is,  to  keep  a  conscience 
void  of  offence,  and  in  your  political  transactions  not  to  act  from 
party  attachments  and  private  connections,  not  to  practise  in- 
trigue to  serve  your  own  interests  or  those  of  your  friends  ;  but  to 
endeavor  to  serve  the  public  in  the  best  manner  according  to 
your  capacity  and  opportunity.  In  so  doing  you  will  appoint  to 
the  several  executive  offices,  men  of  knowledge  and  discretion  ; 
men  that  fear  God  and  hate  covetousness ;  men  who  will  be  just 
and  rule  in  the  fear  of  God.  By  the  promotion  of  such  men, 
virtue  will  be  encouraged  and  vice  will  be  restrained  ;  by  their 
official  proceedings,  law  and  justice  will  be  executed,  and  "judg- 
ment will  run  down  as  waters,  and  righteousness  as  a  mighty 
stream,"  even  that  righteousness  which  exalteth  a  nation."  Then 
shall  our  political  interests  be  in  a  prosperous  state ;  then  shall 
we  be  that  happy  people  whose  God  is  the  Lord. 

The  Reverend  Pastors  of  the  churches,  who  are  present,  will 
also  suffer  the  word  of  exhortation. 

My  fathers  and  brethren, — We  who  are  employed  in  the 
work  of  the  ministry,  are  deeply  interested  in  this  subject.  We 
are  interested  in  the  prosperity  of  the  state,  and  are  peculiarly  in- 
terested in  this  means  of  prosperity  on  which  I  have  been  insist- 
ing. It  is  our  business  to  study  and  teach  Christianity,  and  thus 
to  promote  the  political  good  of  the  state,  as  well  as  the  spiritual 
good  of  the  souls  of  our  hearers.  This  is  a  noble  employment, 
to  fidelity  and  zeal  in  which,  not  only  the  motives  of  religion  call 
us,  but  even  those  of  patriotism.  Therefore  if  we  have  any  love 
to  religion  and  the  souls  of  men  ;  nay  if  we  have  any  public  spir- 
it and  love  to  our  country,  let  us  diligently  study  the  evidences, 
the  nature,  the  doctrines  and  duties  of  Christianity,  and  incul- 
cate them  with  all  plainness,  assiduity  and  perseverance,  giving 
line  upon  line  and  precept  upon  precept.     This  is  to  be  done, 

1.  By  instruction.  Without  communicating  instruction  and 
information  concerning  the  truth,  we  can  expect  to  do  nothing 
in  our  work  to  any  good  purpose.  Knowledge  and  not  igno- 
rance is  the  mother  of  real  devotion.  The  rational  mind  is  to  be 
led  by  the  exhibition  of  the  truth  only. 

2.  By  every  motive  to  persuade,  drawn  from  reason  and  reve- 
lation, from  time  and  eternity  ;  and  among  others  this  motive  of 
the  public  good  of  the  state  and  our  general  happiness,  liberty 
and  prosperity  as  a  people,  is  not  to  be  omitted. 

3.  By  a  christian  life  and  conversation.      If   we  do  these 


■** 


NECESSARY  TO  POLITICAL  PROSPERITY.  209 

things ;  if  we  thus  instruct,  persuade  and  live,  we  shall  at  last 
stand  in  our  lot,  and  shall  be  owned  as  his,  when  Christ  our  Lord 
and  judge  "  shall  make  up  his  jewels." 

Finally  I  shall,  in  the  last  place,  address  myself  in  a  very  few 
words  to  this  numerous  auditory  collectively.  Men  and  breth- 
ren, this  subject  nearly  concerns  you  all.  How  happy  would 
you  be,  if  the  Lord  were  indeed  your  God  ?  Nor  can  you  be 
truly  happy  on  any  other  condition.  However  prosperous  you 
may  be  in  your  private  concerns,  in  your  property,  your  business 
and  your  reputation  ;  yet  unless  you  are  the  objects  of  the  favor 
of  God  and  the  heirs  of  eternal  life,  you  are  truly  in  a  miserable 
situation.  You  have  not  only  the  motive  of  eternal  happiness  to 
choose  the  Lord  for  your  God  ;  but  the  motives  of  the  peace, 
good  order,  and  happiness  of  the  people  as  a  body  politic,  and 
the  general  prosperity  of  the  state.  You  all  feel  a  firm  attach- 
ment to  your  liberties  and  to  the  privileges  of  a  republican  gov- 
ernment. Of  all  forms  of  government  a  republic  most  essential- 
ly requires  virtue  and  good  morals  in  the  great  body  of  the  peo- 
ple, in  order  to  its  prosperity  and  even  its  existence.  But  the 
way  to  virtue  and  good  morals  is  to  choose  the  Lord  for  your 
God.  Nor  is  this  all  ;  you  not  only  have  to  choose  and  serve 
the  Lord  yourselves,  but  by  the  same  reasons  by  which  you  are 
obligated  to  choose  the  Lord  for  your  God,  you  are  obligated  to 
seek  out  and  by  your  suffrages  to  promote  to  legislative  authority, 
such  as  are  of  the  same  character.  In  a  republic  all  authority  is 
derived  from  the  people  ;  and  such  as  they  generally  are,  we 
may  expect  their  representatives,  legislators  and  all  their  civil  au- 
thority will  be.  If  you  have  the  Lord  for  your  God,  you  will 
elect  those  of  the  same  character  with  yourselves,  to  be  your  leg- 
islators ;  you  will  encourage  and  support  them  and  other  faithful 
rulers  in  the  thorough  discharge  of  their  duties  of  civil  govern- 
ment, and  you  will  withhold  your  suffrages  from  those  who  ac- 
knowledge not  the  Lord  as  their  God  and  regard  not  his  law. 
Nor  can  you  consistently  and  innocently  give  your  suffrages  to 
men  of  this  last  description  ;  for  thus  you  would  give  a  sanction 
and  influence  to  sin  and  vice,  would  be  partakers  of  their  wick- 
edness and  would  do  an  injury  to  the  state. 

But  if  you  and  the  good  people  of  the  state  in  general  shall 
unite  to  practise  virtue  and  Christianity,  and  to  promote  the  wisest 
and  best  men  among  us,  we  shall  doubtless  be  that  happy  people 
described  in  the  text,  and  "  judgment  shall  dwell  in  the  wilder- 
ness and  righteousness  remain  in  the  fruitful  field  ;  and  the  work 
of  righteousness  shall  be  peace,  and  the  effect  of  righteousness 
quietness  and  assurance  forever." 


SERMON  XII. 


THE  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS  TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.* 

John  18 :  37.  —  To  this  end  ivas  I  born,  and  for  this  cause  came  I  into  tlie 
world,  that  I  sJiould  bear  witness  unto  the  truth. 

These  are  the  words  of  our  blessed  Savior.  In  them  he  in- 
forms us,  that  one  end  of  his  incarnation  and  ministry  was,  that 
by  bearing  witness  to  the  truth,  he  might  communicate  the  know- 
ledge of  it.  The  same  is  doubtless  the  end  of  the  ordinary  min- 
istry of  the  gospel,  and  should  be  the  object  aimed  at  by  every 
minister.     From  our  text  therefore  I  deduce  this  doctrine  : 

The  great  duty  of  the  ministers  of  the  gospel  is,  to  preach 
the  truth. 

Under  this  doctrine  I  purpose, 

I.  No  show  what  truth  ministers  of  the  gospel  ought  to  preach. 

II.  To  mention  some  reasons  in  confirmation  of  the  doctrine. 
I.  I  am  to  show  what  truth  a  minister  of  the  gospel  ought 

to  preach. 

Truth  is  very  extensive  and  of  various  kinds.  There  is  truth 
in  every  science,  in  mathematics,  philosophy,  history,  etc.  It 
will  not  be  pretended,  that  mathematical  and  philosophical  truth 
is  the  proper  subject  of  the  evangelical  ministry.  Nor  is  histori- 
cal truth,  any  further  than  it  illustrates  the  gospel,  by  exhibiting 
the  facts  of  it,  or  other  important  facts  relating  to  the  works  and 
the  character  of  God. 

The  truth  then  intended  in  the  doctrine  is  primarily  evangeli- 
cal truth,  and  secondarily  all  other  truth  which  relates  to  the  gos- 
pel and  tends  to  illustrate  it ;  as  all  truth  relating  to  God  and  his 
character,  especially  his  moral  perfections ;  all  truth  relating  to 
his  supreme,  universal  and  sovereign  government ;  all  truth  re- 
lating to  his  law,  its  requirements  and  threatenings  ;  relating  to 
sin,  its  nature  and  evil ;  relating  to  ourselves,  our  present  fallen 
state,  and  the  ruin  consequent  on   the  fall  ;  particularly  our  na- 

*  Preached  at  the  ordination  of  the  Rev.  Edward  Dorr  Griffin,  A.  M. 
to  the  pastoral  charge  of  the  church  in  New  Hai'tford,  June  4th,  1795. — 
First  pubhshed  at  Hartford. 


DUTY  OF  MINigTERS.  211 

live  and  total  depravity,  our  actual  sins  and  the  various  aggrava- 
tions of  them  ;  our  demerit  as  sinners  ;  our  dependence  on  the 
mere  mercy  and  sovereign  grace  of  God  ;  our  own  moral  inabili- 
ty to  bring  ourselves  to  repentance  and  holiness  of  heart  and  life, 
and  our  absolute  insufficiency  to  make  satisfaction  for  our  sins  ; 
the  necessity  of  an  atonement  and  one  of  infinite  value,  corres- 
pondent to  the  demerit  of  our  sin  ;  the  character  of  our  Lord  and 
Savior  Jesus  Christ,  his  divinity,  his  humanity,  his  offices,  his 
sufferings  in  our  stead,  and  his  readiness  to  save  sinners  of  every 
description,  who  come  to  him  for  this  purpose  ;  the  conditions  of 
his  salvation,  the  privileges  and  rewards  of  it,  and  the  inevitable 
consequences  of  a  rejection  of  it. 

This  is  a  very  brief  summary  of  the  truths,  which  every  minis- 
ter of  the  gospel  is  obligated  to  preach  and  inculcate. 

II.  /  am  to  mention  some  reasons  in  confirmation  of  this  doc- 
trine. 

The  following  reasons  show,  that  ministers  of  the  gospel  are 
obliged  to  preach  the  truth  or  the  real  doctrines  of  scripture. 

1.  The  truth  was  the  subject  of  the  preaching  of  our  Lord  Je- 
sus Christ.  He  certainly  is  a  proper  example  in  this,  as  well  as 
in  his  common  conduct.  He  was  a  perfect  preacher.  Therefore 
he  is  to  be  imitated  by  all  other  preachers.  And  he  in  our  text, 
informs  us  not  only  that  he  preached  the  truth,  but  that  this  was 
one  great  end  of  his  incarnation  and  ministry. 

2.  The  same  was  the  subject  of  the  preaching  of  the  apostles 
and  prophets.  2  Cor.  4:  2,  "  We  have  renounced  the  hidden 
things  of  dishonesty,  not  walking  in  craftiness,  nor  handling  the 
word  of  God  deceitfully  ;  but  by  manifestation  of  the  truth  com- 
mending ourselves  to  every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God." 
Chap.  13:  8,  "  For  we  can  do  nothing  against  the  truth,  but  for 
the  truth."  Gal.  4:  16,  "  Am  I  therefore  become  your  enemy, 
because  I  tell  you  the  truth?"  1  Tim.  2:  7,  "  Whereunto  I  am 
ordained  a  preacher  and  an  apostle — a  teacher  of  the  Gentiles  in 
faith  and  verity ;"  i.  e.  in  faith  and  truth. 

The  great  business  of  the  prophets  was  to  declare  the  word  of 
God,  which  is  the  truth,  as  it  was  immediately  taught  them,  or 
as  they  were  by  God  directed  to  repeat  former  revelations.  The 
great  business  of  the  apostles  was  to  preach  the  gospel,  which  is 
the  system  of  divine  truth  given  to  the  church  and  to  the  world, 
in  the  last  and  most  perfect  dispensation.  Both  the  prophets  and 
apostles  were  inspired  by  the  infallible  spirit  of  God  which  guided 
them  into  all  necessary  truth,  and  preserved  them,  in  their  official 
proceedings,  from  everything  inconsistent  with  it.  Under  the  in- 
fluence of  this  spirit  they  preached  the  truth  and  that  only. 


212  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS 

3.  The  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  necessary  to  true  religion. 
It  is  necessary  both  to  the  affections  and  to  the  practice  of  it. 

(1)  The  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  necessary  to  true  religious 
affections.  The  knowledge  of  the  true  God  is  necessary  to  the 
true  love  of  God.  That  love  of  God,  which  implies  true  virtue 
and  real  holiness,  is  the  love  of  the  true  God  and  of  the  true  and 
real  character  of  God.  To  love  any  other  than  the  true  charac- 
ter of  God,  is  as  really  to  love  a  false  God  as  to  love  Jupiter  or 
Dagon.  For  instance  to  love  God  as  a  perfectly  holy  and  wise 
God,  is  a  holy  affection ;  but  to  love  him  as  one  who  tolerates 
and  connives  at  sin  and  saves  all  at  last,  whatever  their  lives  and 
characters  be  in  this  world,  is  a  wrong  and  sinful  affection.  To 
love  God  as  a  benevolent  being,  aiming  at  his  own  glory  consist- 
ing in  the  good  and  happiness  of  the  intellectual  system,  is  a 
right  and  holy  affection.  But  to  love  him  in  the  idea,  that  he  is 
aiming  at  some  partial,  private  good,  or  our  own  particular  good 
only,  is  no  exercise  of  true  virtue,  but  a  mere  love  of  ourselves 
or  of  some  party.  Therefore  we  must  have  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth  in  this  important  particular,  and  just  ideas  of  the  divine 
character,  in  order  to  the  exercise  of  true  virtue  and  religion  in 
the  love  of  God. 

Similar  observations  may  be  made  concerning  the  divine  law. 
If  we  believe  that  it  forbids  and  condemns  some  sins  only,  and  in 
that  view  love  it,  there  is  in  that  love  no  true  religion,  but  irreli- 
gion.  If  we  believe  it  forbids  all  sin  and  love  it  in  that  view,  that 
is  true  virtue  and  religion.  If  we  love  the  divine  law,  because 
we  believe  it  denounces  some  small  temporary  punishment,  and 
cannot  bear  it,  as  threatening  an  endless  punishment,  we  hereby 
show,  that  we  are  not  friends,  but  enemies  to  the  law  and  the 
truth. 

We  must  believe,  that  there  is  a  God,  or  we  cannot  love  him 
at  all.  We  must  believe,  that  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Savior,  or  we 
cannot  receive  and  trust  in  him  as  our  Savior.  We  must  be- 
lieve the  scriptures,  or  how  shall  we  receive  and  comply  with 
them?  We  must  believe  that  we  are  sinners,  or  we  can  never 
repent.  We  must  believe  the  atonement,  or  we  shall  never  de- 
pend on  it,  nor  seek  forgiveness  and  salvation  on  the  ground  of 
it.  And  so  with  respect  to  every  other  truth  of  the  gospel.  We 
can  have  no  right  exercise  or  affection  in  view  of  any  truth,  un- 
less we  know  and  believe  that  truth. 

(2)  The  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  necessary  to  all  genuine  re- 
ligious practice.  Genuine  practice  implies  genuine  affections, 
and  is  founded  on  them.  Therefore  without  repeating,  it  is  suf- 
ficient to  say,  that  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  necessary  to  gen- 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  213 

ulne  religious  practice,  for  the  same  reasons,  that  it  is  necessary 
to  genuine  religious  affections. 

Having  thus  briefly  illustrated  the  doctrine,  and  having  men- 
tioned some  reasons  in  confirmation  of  it,  I  proceed  to  several  in- 
ferences, which  were  indeed  principally  intended,  in  the  choice 
of  this  subject. 

1.  Hence  we  see  the  groundlessness  of  a  sentiment  holden  and 
advanced  by  many  in  these  days,  that  it  is  of  no  importance  what 
a  man's  religious  creed  or  sentiments  are,  provided  he  be  an  hon- 
est man  and  sincere  in  his  religion.  Let  us  examine  this  senti- 
ment. 

By  an  honest  man  in  this  proposition  must  be  meant,  either 
one  who  is  honest  and  just  in  matters  of  property  ;  or  one  who 
in  his  religion  professes  and  acts  as  he  thinks.  If  the  latter  be 
meant,  then  an  honest  man  and  one  who  is  sincere  in  his  reli- 
gion are  the  very  same  ;  and  then  the  proposition  now  under  con- 
sideration is  this,  that  it  is  of  no  importance  what  a  man's  reli- 
gious sentiments  are,  provided  that  in  his  religion  he  believes  as 
he  professes  and  does  what  he  believes  to  be  right.  But  this  any 
man  may  do,  let  his  religion  be  what  it  will.  A  papist,  a  Mo- 
hammedan or  a  pagan  may  be  equally  sincere  in  this  sense,  as  the 
best  Christian  ;  and  if  this  sincerity  be  all  which  is  necessary  in 
religion  ;  then  all  kinds  of  religions,  as  to  that  which  is  essential 
to  true  religion  and  the  benefits  of  it,  are  perfectly  alike  ;  and  of 
course  it  is  a  matter  of  indifference  which  we  embrace  and  which 
we  reject,  if  we  embrace  any.  But  this  cannot  be  reconciled 
with  either  scripture  or  reason.  Many  of  the  ancient  worshippers 
of  Dagon  and  Baal,  and  of  the  gods  many  and  lords  many,  so 
called,  were  very  sincere  and  in  good  earnest  in  their  worship  ; 
yet  they  are  every  where  condemned  in  scripture,  as  they  are 
also  by  the  voice  of  reason. 

But  perhaps  it  will  be  said,  that  in  the  proposition,  that  it  is  of 
no  importance  what  a  man's  religious  sentiments  are,  provided 
he  be  an  honest  man  and  sincere  in  his  religion ;  by  honesty  is 
meant  moral  honesty,  or  justice  to  man  in  matters  of  property. 
If  this  be  intended,  then  the  proposition  is  this,  that  justice  to 
men  together  with  the  forementioned  sincerity,  is  the  whole  of 
religion.  But  we  see  by  what  has  been  said  already,  that  the 
forementioned  sincerity  is  no  part  of  true  religion,  and  that  in  this 
respect  it  is  just  nothing  at  all.  Therefore  if  justice  to  men  with 
this  sincerity  be  the  whole  of  religion  ;  as  this  sincerity  is  no  part 
of  true  religion,  the  whole  of  it  must  centre  in  mere  justice  to  men. 
But  this  cannot  be  reconciled  with  either  scripture  or  reason.  The 
scripture  requires  us  to  render  not  only  unto  Caesar  the  things 

Vol.  II.  19 


214  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS 

which  are  Caesar's,  but  also  unto  God,  the  things  which  are  God's ; 
and  the  Jews  in  the  time  of  the  prophet  Malachi,  were  severely 
reproved  for  having  robbed  God.  Mai.  2:  8,  "  Will  a  man  rob 
God  ?  Yet  ye  have  robbed  me.  But  ye  say,  wherein  have  we 
robbed  thee  ?  In  tythes  and  offerings."  Yea,  the  scripture  re- 
quires us  to  love  the  Lord  our  God  with  all  our  heart.  And  it  is 
perfectly  rational,  that  if  he  be  supremely  great,  good  and  glori- 
ous ;  if  he  be  our  Creator,  our  chief  and  constant  benefactor  ; 
he  should  be  the  object  of  our  first  and  chief  regard.  So  that 
justice  to  men  and  a  mere  moral  life,  are  so  far  from  the  whole  of 
religion,  that  they  are  not  the  principal  part  of  it. 

That  it  is  of  no  importance  what  a  man's  religious  sentiments 
are,  is  so  far  from  the  truth,  that  nothing  is  more  manifest,  than 
that  those  sentiments  must  daily  influence  his  religious  feelings 
and  affections,  and  consequently  his  practice.  If  a  man  believe, 
that  he  is  dependent  on  divine  grace  for  a  renovation,  sanctifica- 
tion  and  forgiveness,  this  naturally  tends  to  humble  him.  But  if 
he  believe,  that  he  is  in  no  need  of  divine  grace  in  any  of  these 
respects,  he  must  necessarily  feel  so  far  self-sufficient,  so  far  in- 
dependent, and  consequently  must  be  spiritually  proud  and  self- 
righteous.  If  he  believe  the  necessity  of  the  atonement  of  Christ ; 
this  powerfully  persuades  him  to  look  thither  and  to  place  his 
dependence  there.  If  he  believe  not  the  necessity  of  the  atone- 
ment, we  may  be  sure  he  will  depend  on  some  other  foundation. 
If  he  believe,  that  God  will  pardon,  and  is  by  his  own  infinite 
goodness  bound  to  pardon,  any  sinner  in  consequence  of  his  repen- 
tance merely,  without  a  mediator  ;  he  will  certainly  neglect  Christ 
as  the  mediator.  But  if  he  believe,  that  a  mediator  is  absolutely 
necessary,  and  that  there  is  no  other  name  but  that  of  Christ,  given 
under  heaven  among  men,  whereby  we  can  be  saved,  what  can 
more  strongly  urge  him  to  receive  and  trust  in  Christ  ?  Thus  as 
a  man  thinketh  in  his  heart  so  is  he  ;  such  is  his  real  character; 
and  no  man  can  commonly  be  expected  to  be  better  than  his 
principles. 

2.  Hence  we  see  the  mistake  of  those  who  hold,  that  we  need 
not  know  much  of  the  doctrines  of  Christianity  ;  that  it  is  not 
useful  either  for  the  purpose  of  conviction  to  sinners  or  edification 
to  saints  ;  that  such  knowledge  rather  tends  to  stifle  and  prevent 
both  conviction  and  edification  ;  that  we  may  be  just  as  good 
christians  without  that  knowledge  as  with  it ;  yea  better,  because 
it  rather  obstructs  christian  experience  and  exercise,  and  quenches 
christian  zeal  and  fervor. 

But  on  candid  examination  it  will  be  found,  that  this  is  a  great 
mistake  ;  and  that  the  knowledge  of  divine  truth  is  of  a  most  hap- 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  215 

py  tendency  both  to  the  conviction  of  sinners  and  the  edification 
of  saints.  Certainly  the  knowledge  of  the  existence  and  charac- 
ter of  God,  of  his  holiness  and  his  will,  of  his  law  and  of  our  vio- 
lations of  it,  of  the  righteousness  and  goodness  of  the  law,  of 
the  punishment  and  evil  of  sin,  of  the  grace  of  the  gospel  and  of 
our  neglect  of  that  grace,  most  directly  tends  to  produce  and  in- 
crease conviction.  Indeed  genuine  conviction  cannot  exist  with- 
out knowledge  of  this  kind  ;  and  whatever  fear  or  terror,  without 
the  knowledge  of  the  truth,  exists  in  any  man's  mind,  which 
some  call  conviction,  is  mere  enthusiasm  and  not  genuine  con- 
viction. 

The  knowledge  of  the  truth  is  equally  useful  and  necessary  to  ed- 
ification as  to  conviction.  The  necessity  of  it  to  this,  I  before  en- 
deavored to  illustrate.  How  can  we  love  God,  if  we  know  him  not  ? 
or  believe  in  Christ,  without  the  knowledge  of  him  ?  and  so  in  every 
instance  of  christian  exercise.  And  the  more  we  know  of  God, 
the  more  opportunity  and  the  greater  motives  we  have,  to  love, 
fear  and  serve  him.  The  more  we  know  of  his  glorious  majesty 
and  sovereignty,  the  greater  motive  we  have  to  adore,  praise  and 
submit  to  him.  The  more  the  christian  knows  of  the  divine  law,  the 
more  will  he  naturally  delight  in  it  after  the  inward  man.  The  more 
he  knows  of  Christ,  his  grace,  sufficiency  and  fulness,  the  more 
will  he  rejoice  and  trust  in  him.  And  so  with  respect  to  all  di- 
vine truth.  Just  as  a  man,  who  has  a  taste  for  music,  or  poetry, 
or  the  fine  arts  in  general,  is  more  delighted,  the  more  he  is  in- 
structed in  those  arts,  and  his  taste  for  them  and  for  their  pecu- 
liar and  most  delightful  excellences,  is  the  more  increased. 

So  that  there  is  no  foundation  for  the  imagination,  that  the 
knowledge  of  christian  doctrines  tends  to  obstruct  either  convic- 
tion or  edification.  Indeed  that  kind  of  conviction  and  edifica- 
tion, w^hich  is  not  built  on  the  foundation  of  the  truth,  but  of  im- 
agination, is  obstructed  by  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  and  will 
naturally  be  abolished  by  it.  And  the  sooner  such  conviction 
and  edification  are  abolished,  the  better,  as  they  are  not  favorable 
to  true  religion,  but  to  enthusiasm  and  false  religion,  which  so  far 
as  they  obtain,  lead  astray  from  the  footsteps  of  the  flock,  and 
this  straying  may  be  fatal  to  the  soul. 

3.  Hence  we  infer  the  duty  of  all,  who  live  under  the  light  of 
the  gospel,  diligently  to  study  the  doctrines  of  it  and  of  the  whole 
word  of  God.  This  is  the  way  to  know  more  of  God,  of  his  law, 
of  his  will,  of  Christ  and  of  the  free  and  infinite  grace  of  God, 
and  the  way  to  greater  joy  in  them  and  conformity  to  them. 
This  is  the  w^ay  to  know  more  of  our  own  vileness  as  sinners, 
and  to  be  more  humble  in  the  view  of  it.    This  is  the  way  to  know 


216  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS 

more  of  our  duty  and  of  the  motives  to  the  performance  of  it. 
But  the  knowledge  of  all  these  objects  tends  most  directly  to  our 
edification  in  the  christian  life. 

4.  Especially  are  ministers  of  the  gospel  under  obligation  to 
the  careful  study  of  its  doctrines.  Their  principal  business,  as 
has  been  attempted  to  be  illustrated,  is  to  preach  and  teach  the 
truth.  But  how  shall  they  be  able  to  teach  the  truth,  if  they  be 
ignorant  of  it  themselves  ?  And  the  knowledge  of  it  is  to  be  ob- 
tained in  no  other  way,  than  by  a  diligent  study  of  the  scriptures. 

Besides,  they  ought  to  seek  their  own  edification.  They  are 
at  least  under  equal  obligation  to  this,  as  other  men.  Nay,  their 
obligation  is  greater,  in  proportion  to  their  greater  advantages  for 
edification,  and  the  greater  advantage  which  their  own  edifica- 
tion gives  tiiem,  to  promote  that  of  others. 

Yet  not  only  are  some  ministers  too  negligent  of  this  duty  of 
thoroughly  studying  the  doctrines  of  scripture,  but  some  design- 
edly avoid  it.  They  mean  to  preach  jjractically  and  not  to  puz- 
zle their  people  with  deep  doctrines.  No  doubt  that  preaching 
which  is  truly  practical,  is  the  best  and  most  useful.  But  that  a 
minister  may  preach  practically  and  most  usefully,  it  is  not  neces- 
sary that  he  be  ignorant  of  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel ;  nor  is  it 
necessary,  that  he  should  not  preach  those  doctrines.  That  is 
the  most  practical  preaching,  which  most  happily  conduces  to  pro- 
mote christian  experience  and  practice  ;  and  that  preaching  most 
happily  conduces  to  promote  these,  which  is  founded  on  the  truth 
and  which  urges  all  the  motives  and  arguments,  which  the  truth 
affords,  to  excite  to  christian  experience  and  practice  ;  and  any 
other  arguments  than  these  are  not  proper  to  be  urged,  nor  do 
they  on  the  whole  lead  to  christian  experience  and  practice,  but 
to  enthusiasm,  and  ultimately  to  irreligion  and  infidelity. 

Some  seem  to  conceive,  tliat  it  is  a  minister's  duty  to  exhort 
only,  and  urge  and  press  his  hearers  to  become  and  to  live  as 
christians.  But  are  these  exhortations  to  be  pressed  with  motives 
drawn  from  the  truth  or  from  falsehood  ?  The  latter  will  not  be 
pretended  ;  and  as  there  is  no  medium  in  the  case,  they  must  be 
pressed  with  arguments  drawn  from  the  truth  only.  And  in  order 
to  this  the  truth  must  be  known,  must  be  searched  out  by  study, 
and  must  be  taught ;  which  is  the  very  thing  for  which  I  plead. 
The  mind  cannot  be  rationally  persuaded  by  any  other  means, 
than  by  arguments  drawn  from  the  truth  ;  nor  indeed  ought  it. 

Therefore  for  a  minister  to  neglect  his  studies,  on  this  princi- 
ple, that  the  knowledge  of  divine  truth  is  not  necessary  or  useful 
to  enable  him  to  preach  practically  and  usefully,  is  to  proceed  on 
ground  that  will  by  no  means  support  him.     The  only  truly  prac- 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  217 

tical  and  useful  preaching  is  that  which  is  founded  on  the  truth 
and  is  enforced  with  arguments  drawn  from  it ;  and  to  such 
preaching  a  knowledge  and  dihgent  study  of  the  trutiis  and  doc- 
trines of  the  gospel,  are  necessary. 

For  a  minister  to  neglect  the  study  of  those  truths  from  indo- 
lence,  is  still  worse  ;  it  is  inexcusable.  Ministers  are  bound  to 
be  at  least  as  industrious  as  other  men,  and  many  arguments 
might  be  mentioned  why  they  should,  if  their  health  admit,  be 
still  more  industrious. 

But  it  is  to  be  feared,  that  some  neglect  study  on  a  still  differ- 
ent principle.  They  are  afraid,  that  if  they  study  thoroughly  and 
attend  to  what  has  been  or  may  be  said  on  certain  important  sub- 
jects, they  shall  be  convinced,  that  those  doctrines  are  true,  which 
in  some  places  are  extremely  unpopular.  Therefore  they  do  not 
wish  to  be  convinced  of  their  truth,  and  will  not  attend  to  them, 
lest  they  should  be  convinced  ;  or  lest  they  should  be  under  a 
necessity  of  giving  their  opinion  concerning  them,  and  thus  ex- 
pose themselves  to  the  censure  of  one  party  or  the  other,  either 
the  advocates  or  the  opposers  of  those  doctrines.  For  this  rea- 
son they  will  not  read  those  books,  in  which  those  doctrines  are 
contained,  nor  converse  much  with  those  persons,  who  hold  them. 
And  if  they  be  asked  their  opinion,  they  make  this  apology  for 
not  giving  it,  that  they  have  not  read  the  books,  nor  examined 
the  arguments  relating  to  those  doctrines ;  and  of  set  purpose 
they  avoid  to  do  either. 

Now  can  this  be  justified  ?  What  is  this  but  shutting  their 
eyes  against  the  light?  And  how  can  this  be  done  with  a  good 
conscience  ?  Are  we  not  commanded  to  "  prove  all  things,  and 
to  hold  fast  that  which  is  good  ?"  Besides ;  this  conduct  ar- 
gues a  want  of  liberality  of  sentiment,  and  a  contractedness,  which 
it  is  presumed,  they  who  act  in  this  manner,  would  not  wish  to 
have  imputed  to  them.  A  man  of  true  liberality  of  sentiment  and 
feeling,  is  willing  to  hear  both  sides  of  every  important  question, 
and  is  not  afraid  that  he  shall  receive  too  much  light. 

5.  Hence  we  learn,  that  it  is  the  duty  of  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel, to  preach  the  truth  plainly  and  in  a  manner  that  is  intelligi- 
ble to  their  people  in  general.  I  have  endeavored  to  show,  that 
it  is  their  principal  duty  to  preach  the  truth  ;  but  to  preach  it  in 
obscure  and  unintelligible  terms  is  not  very  different  from  not 
preaching  it  at  all.  The  words  of  the  apostle  Paul  are  worthy  of 
notice  in  this  case.  1  Cor.  14:  19,  "In  the  church  I  had  rather 
speak  five  words  with  my  understanding,  that  with  my  voice  I 
might  teach  others  also,  than  ten  thousand  words  in  an  unknown 
tongue."     Nor  ought  we  to  be  deterred  from  preaching  any  es- 

19* 


218  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS 

sential  truth,  by  the  consideration,  that  it  is  unpopular.  Every 
truth  of  the  gospel  in  its  proper  connection  is  opposed  to  the  car- 
nal heart,  and  with  carnal  men  will  be  unpopular.  Therefore 
if  w^e  proceed  on  this  ground,  we  must  suppress  every  truth. 

Indeed  some  preachers,  it  is  confessed,  act  an  imprudent  part. 
They  declare  the  most  offensive  truths  in  the  most  offensive 
terms,  and  in  those  terms,  against  which  their  hearers  or  many  of 
them  are  greatly  prejudiced,  and  which  they  really  misunderstand, 
having  been  long  accustomed  to  affix  to  them  a  wrong  meaning. 
This  is  not  to  teach  the  truth  ;  but  it  is  the  way  to  prevent  the 
knowledge  of  it ;  and  the  way  not  to  do  good  but  hurt.  There 
are  two  extremes  in  this,  as  in  other  cases.  One  is,  not  to  de- 
clare important  and  useful  truth  faithfully  ;  the  other  is,  to  de- 
clare it,  either  in  words  not  understood  in  the  sense,  in  which 
they  are  used  by  the  speaker,  or  before  the  hearers  are  prepared 
to  receive  it,  by  having  learned  other  truths  necessary  previously 
to  be  known. 

6.  It  is  the  sentiment  and  doctrine  of  some,  that  on  all  dispu- 
table points,  ministers  should  preach  in  scripture  language  ;  that 
this  would  be  a  happy  way  to  avoid  all  disputes  in  religion  ;  that 
all  public  formulas,  creeds,  confessions  and  doctrines  of  faith, 
should  be  drawn  up  in  scripture  language  entirely  ;  that  thus 
christians  would  be  agreed,  and  dissensions,  parties  and  separa- 
tions would  be  at  an  end.  Let  us  consider  this  matter.  It  is 
said  that  on  disputable  points  ministers  should  preach  in  scrip- 
ture language  only.  But  all  the  peculiar  and  the  most  important 
doctrines  of  the  gospel  are  disputable.  And  shall  ministers  do 
nothing  toward  teaching  those  doctrines,  beside  reading  the  scrip- 
tures to  their  people  ?  All  who  can  read,  as  all,  or  almost  all 
among  us  can,  may  read  them  for  themselves.  Yet  the  sentiment 
now  under  consideration  will  come  to  this,  that  ministers  are  to  do 
nothing  toward  public  instruction,  beside  publicly  reading  the 
scriptures.  For  if  they  must  use  scripture  language  only  on  all 
the  most  important  subjects,  why  not  on  all  the  less  important  ? 
What  advantage  is  there  in  deviating  from  the  words  of  scripture 
in  the  latter  case,  more  than  in  the  former  ?  And  if  one  word, 
which  is  not  scriptural,  may  be  used  in  the  pulpit,  why  not 
another  ?  and  where  shall  we  fix  the  limits  ? 

Besides,  this  sentiment  will  not  only  exclude  from  the  pulpit  all 
words  and  phrases,  which  are  not  used  in  scripture  ;  but  it  will 
confine  us  to  use  the  words  of  scripture  in  the  very  same  order  in 
which  they  stand  in  scripture.  The  design  of  using  the  mere 
language  of  scripture  is,  to  alter  not  the  sense  of  it  and  to  avoid 
all  disputes  concerning  that  sense  and  concerning  the  doctrines  of 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  219 

Christianity.  Bat  though  we  use  the  words  of  scripture  only,  yet 
if  we  shift  their  arrangement,  we  may  aher  their  sense  entirely ; 
and  this  not  only  by  altering  the  arrangement  of  the  words  of 
particular  sentences  ;  but  by  selecting  arud  arranging  sentences 
themselves.  So  that  mere  using  scripture  words  and  phrases, 
whether  in  preaching  or  in  our  public  formulas,  will  not  answer 
the  end  intended,  unless  we  preserve  the  exact  order,  as  well  as  the 
words  of  scripture ;  that  is,  unless  we  merely  7'ead  the  scripture. 

Some  sensible  of  this  consequence  of  their  doctrine,  have 
avowed  it  with  regard  to  public  formulas.  But  to  be  consistent, 
they  must  avow  it  with  regard  to  all  teaching  in  religion,  and 
must  hold,  that  there  should  be  no  religious  instruction,  beside 
the  reading  of  the  scriptures. 

In  defence  of  this  doctrine  it  has  been  said,  that  the  language 
of  scripture  was  chosen  by  Omniscience,  and  is  therefore  the  best 
possible  ;  that  it  is  in  vain  therefore  to  attempt  to  mend  or  ex- 
plain it  by  words  of  our  own  choosing  ;  that  we  might  as  well  at- 
tempt to  mend  any  other  of  the  works  of  God.  But  all  this  goes 
on  the  ground  of  the  impropriety  of  our  using  any  other  means  of 
religious  instruction,  than  the  reading  of  the  scriptures  ;  a  ground 
on  which  those  who  use  this  reasoning,  will  not  dare  to  rest  their 
cause. 

As  to  the  alleged  absurdity  of  explaining  the  language  of 
scripture,  which  is  said  to  be  equal  to  an  attempt  to  mend  or  im- 
prove the  other  works  of  God  ;  I  observe,  that  in  a  certain  sense 
we  may  and  do  daily  improve  the  works  of  God.  No  man  imagines 
that  there  is  any  impiety  or  absurdity  in  clearing  and  cultivating 
his  lands,  or  in  grinding  his  grain  into  meal  and  making  it  into 
bread.  Yet  there  is  as  much  of  both  impiety  and  absurdity  in 
either  of  these,  as  in  explaining  by  the  use  of  other  words,  such 
texts  as  these  :  "  The  plowers  have  plowed  on  my  back  and  made 
long  their  furrows  ;"  and  "  He  that  believeth  on  me  as  the  scrip- 
ture hath  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water." 

Though  the  language  of  scripture  was  doubtless  the  best  possi- 
ble on  the  whole  ;  yet  this  does  not  prove  but  that  other  words 
may  be  used  in  a  variety  of  instances,  which  will  better  explain 
the  meaning  of  scripture,  at  least  to  many  particular  persons  or 
societies  of  men,  than  the  words  of  scripture  themselves.  A  word 
or  phrase  which  is  very  determinate  in  one  place  or  nation,  may 
be  very  ambiguous  in  another.  Nor  was  it  possible  for  Omnis- 
cience itself  to  make  a  selection  of  words,  which  would  not  be 
liable  to  this  inconvenience  in  the  present  state  of  mankind,  any 
more  than  it  was  possible  for  omniscience  to  give  a  revelation, 
which  could  not  be  abused  and  perverted  by   depraved  men. 


220  DUTY  OP  MINISTERS 

Now,  when  a  word  or  phrase  of  scripture  is  become  ambiguous 
in  a  particular  age  or  country,  there  is  no  absurdity  in  supposing 
that  this  word  or  phrase  should  be  explained  by  other  words  or 
phrases,  which  in  that  age  and  country  are  not  so  ambiguous  ; 
though  with  respect  to  all  ages  and  all  countries,  the  last  supposed 
words  and  phrases  may  not  be  so  clear  and  useful,  as  those,  which 
they  are  used  in  a  particular  time  and  place  to  explain. 

7.  Hence  we  infer  that  ministers  are  not  bound  to  preach  plain 
things  only.  This  is  the  idea  of  some  ;  and  that  ministers  ought 
never  to  meddle  with  things  which  are  not  plain.  But  unless 
this  be  so  explained,  as  to  be  nothing  but  what  all  will  grant,  it 
can  never  be  supported.  If  by  plain  things,  be  meant  things 
which  are  already  plain  and  well  known  to  the  hearers,  then  a 
minister  is  never  to  teach  his  people  anything ;  and  he  is  bound 
to  preach  so  to  them,  that  they  shall  not,  under  his  preaching, 
make  the  least  improvement  in  christian  knowledge ;  which  is 
absurd  and  what  no  man  will  undertake  to  support.  But  if  by 
plain  things  be  meant,  things  which  are  capable  of  being  made 
plain  to  the  hearers,  or  which,  if  they  will  be  attentive  and  candid, 
may,  by  the  evidence  of  reason  or  revelation,  be  made  to  appear 
to  be  credible  and  manifest  truths  ;  it  is  granted  that  in  this  sense 
a  minister  must  preach  plain  things  only.  But  the  proposition 
thus  explained,  comes  to  nothing. 

8.  Also  hence  we  see  the  absurdity  of  parents  refusing  to 
teach  their  children  any  particular  sentiments  in  religion,  even 
those  which  they  themselves  believe  ;  and  leaving  them  to  judge 
for  themselves,  without  any  such  instruction.  This  is  advocated 
and  practised  by  some,  on  the  pretences,  that  their  children  have 
a  right  of  private  judgment  in  religion  and  a  liberty  of  conscience  ; 
that  teaching  them  any  particular  religious  sentiments  would  cur- 
tail this  liberty,  would  shackle  their  judgment  and  their  genius, 
and  would  prevent  improvement.  But  these  reasons,  if  they  prove 
anything  prove  too  much,  and  so  confute  themselves.  Children 
grown  to  a  proper  age  have  a  right  to  judge  for  themselves  in 
politics,  as  well  as  religion.  They  have  a  right  to  judge,  whether 
monarchy  or  democracy,  whether  a  free  or  a  despotic  government 
be  the  best.  Also  they  have  a  right  to  judge  for  themselves  in 
morals,  whether  it  be  best  and  obligatory  on  them,  to  be  temper- 
ate and  prudent,  and  to  observe  truth  and  justice  in  their  inter- 
course with  their  fellow-men.  Yet  no  man  will  be  thought  to  cur- 
tail his  son's  right  of  private  judgment  or  his  liberty  of  conscience, 
by  teaching  him  the  principles  of  true  civil  liberty,  or  the  moral 
duties  of  temperance,  prudence,  and  justice.  Nay,  our  children 
at  a  proper  age,  have  a  right  to  judge  for  themselves  what  busi- 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  221 

ness  to  follow  in  life  and  in  what  manner  to  carry  it  on.  Yet  no 
man  scruples  to  bring  up  his  son  to  some  particular  business. 
Nor  docs  any  man  imagine,  that  he  curtails  the  liberty  of  his  son, 
by  educating  him  for  a  scholar,  a  husbandman  or  a  mechanic. 
Nor  is  it  ever  thought  that  if  parents  educate  their  children  to 
some  particular  business,  they  cramp  their  genius  or  prevent  im- 
provement. On  the  principle  which  I  am  considering,  a  parent 
must  never  teach  his  son  anything.  Though  he  wish  to  have 
him  a  husbandman,  he  must  never  teach  him  the  use  of  the 
plough  or  scythe  ;  though  he  wish  to  have  him  a  carpenter,  he 
must  never  teach  the  use  of  the  saw  or  chisel ;  though  he  wish  to 
have  him  a  scholar,  he  must  never  teach  him  to  read  or  write ; 
for  the  son  has  the  same  right  of  private  judgment  concerning 
the  best  mode  of  reading  and  writing,  and  of  using  any  kind  of 
utensils,  which  he  has  to  judge  in  matters  of  religion  ;  and  teach- 
ing him  any  of  the  things  just  mentioned  would  be  as  likely  to 
prevent  improvement  by  cramping  his  genius,  as  teaching  him 
the  principles  of  Christianity. 

As  these  ideas  of  the  education  of  children  are  contrary  to  rea- 
son, they  are  equally  contrary  to  scripture.  That  commands  us 
to  "  train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he  should  go,"  with  encourage- 
ment that  "  when  he  is  old,  he  shall  not  depart  from  it,"  and  to 
"  bring  up  our  children  in  the  nurture  and  admonition  of  the  Lord." 

Some  allow  indeed,  that  children  are  to  be  taught  that  the 
scriptures  are  the  word  of  God  ;  but  are  not  to  be  taught  the  par- 
ticular doctrines  contained  in  the  scriptures  ;  that  as  to  the  mean- 
ing and  contents  of  the  scriptures,  they  are  to  judge  entirely  for 
themselves.  But  why  are  they  not  to  be  taught,  as  well  that  the 
scriptures  contain  such  and  such  particular  doctrines,  as  that  the 
scriptures  themselves  are  the  word  of  God  ?  They  have  the  same 
right  of  private  judgment  in  the  one  of  these  cases  as  the  other. 
To  teach  our  children,  that  the  scriptures  are  the  word  of  God, 
and  not  to  teach  them  any  of  the  particular  doctrines  of  scripture, 
is  like  carefully  teaching  them  that  a  certain  volume  contains  the 
laws  of  our  country  ;  but  at  the  same  time  cautiously  avoiding  to 
teach  them  any  of  the  laws  which  are  contained  in  that  volume  ; 
or  teaching  them,  that  husbandry  is  the  best  business  of  life  ;  yet 
not  teaching  them  anything  in  particular  concerning  husbandry. 

9.  If  ministers  be  bound  to  teach  the  truths  and  doctrines  of 
the  gospel ;  people  are  bound  to  attend,  to  hear  and  learn  those 
truths.  If  ministers  be  bound  to  take  great  pains  to  teach,  peo- 
ple are  bound  to  take  correspondent  pains  to  learn  and  to  acquire 
knowledge.  These  duties  mutually  imply  each  other,  and  it  is 
absurd  to  separate  them. 


222  DUTY  OF  MINISTERS 

For  the  same  reasons  people  are  bound  to  seek  for  a  minister 
who  will  instruct  them  ;  and  divine  grace,  though  essential  to 
the  character  of  a  good  minister  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  not  sufficient 
to  constitute  that  character.  It  is  necessary  that  he  be  "  able  to 
teach  others  also." 

I  shall  now  close  this  discourse  with  an  address,  first  to  the  pas- 
tor elect,  and  then  to  the  church  and  society  in  this  place. 

I.  To  the  pastor  elect. 

My  dear  sir, — I  have  endeavored  to  represent  the  importance 
and  necessity  of  preaching  the  truth  ;  and  have  done  it  with  a 
special  reference  to  you.  We  who  are  in  the  ministry  are  al- 
ways liable  to  temptation,  as  in  other  respects,  so  in  faithfully 
preaching  the  truth.  And  the  very  circumstance,  which  in  itself 
is  so  agreeable,  that  there  is  so  great  and  cordial  an  unanimity 
among  this  people,  with  respect  to  your  settlement  among  them, 
may  increase  your  temptation.  It  may  make  you  more  remiss  in 
your  studies  and  more  negligent  in  faithfully  declaring  the  truth. 
It  may  put  you  off  your  guard,  and  thus  you  may  expose  your- 
self and  expose  the  cause  of  truth.  It  may  be  an  occasion  of  a 
presumptuous  conduct  or  mode  of  preaching;  or  on  the  other 
hand,  it  may  be  the  occasion  of  making  you  excessively  compli- 
ant, so  as  to  suppress  important  and  useful  truth,  in  order  to  pre- 
serve the  present  peace  and  unanimity.  I  beseech  you  to  avoid 
all  these,  "  to  hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words  once  delivered 
to  the  saints,"  and  not  to  be  seduced  from  them  by  any  tempta- 
tion. Yet  preach  the  truth  prudently  and  with  circumspection. 
All  things  that  are  lawful,  are  not  expedient.  Beware  of  preach- 
ing so  as  to  be  misunderstood  by  the  use  of  terms,  to  which  your 
people  have  affixed  ideas  different  from  your  own.  Dwell  not 
perpetually  on  a  few  favorite  topics.  All  evangelical  truth  is  di- 
vine ;  all  is  useful. 

That  you  may  thus  preach,  read  extensively.  "  Beware  of  the 
man  who  reads  but  one  book,"  is  an  old  and  sensible  observation. 
By  reading  extensively  you  will  see  not  only  what  truth  others 
have  taught,  but  what  errors  they  have  taught,  and  the  reasons 
with  which  they  have  endeavored  to  support  those  errors.  Thus 
you  will  know  how  the  better  to  guard  against  those  errors,  and 
to  illustrate  the  contrary  truth. 

You  are  to  teach  the  truth  not  only  in  the  pulpit,  but  day  by 
day  in  your  walk  and  conversation.  Thus  not  only  you  will  show, 
that  you  believe  what  you  preach,  but  you  will  add  force  to  it. 

You,  as  well  as  ministers  in  general,  will  have  great  need  of 
prudence  in  all  your  conduct,  and  of  keeping  the  entire  mastery 
of  yourself.     "  He  that  ruleth  his  spirit,  is  better  than  he  that 


TO  PREACH  THE  TRUTH.  223 

taketh  a  city."  In  cases  of  opposition  (and  you  may  have  oppo- 
sition, notwithstanding  the  present  happy  appearance)  the  great- 
est danger  is  from  ourselves.  If  we  do  not  keep  under  our  pas- 
sions and  fcchngs,  our  enemies  will  not  fail  to  take  the  advantage 
of  us.  This  therefore,  in  case  of  opposition,  you  are  to  expect ; 
and  the  consequence  may  be  fatal  to  your  comfort  and  usefulness 
in  this  place,  and  detrimental  to  the  cause  of  truth  in  general. 
But  if  agreeably  to  our  Lord's  direction,  you  be  wise  as  a  serpent 
and  harmless  as  a  dove  ;  if  you  preach  the  truth  faithfully  and 
feel  and  live  accordingly,  you  may  hope  for  a  blessing  on  your 
ministry.  But  however  this  may  be,  you  will  be  accepted  and 
approved  by  the  great  shepherd  of  the  sheep,  who  will  say  to  you 
at  last,  "  Well  done,  thou  good  and  faithful  servant ;  thou  hast 
been  faithful  over  a  few  things  ;  I  will  make  thee  ruler  over  many 
things  ;  enter  thou  into  the  joy  of  thy  Lord." 

II.  I  am  to  address  myself  in  a  very  few  words  to  this  church 
and  society. 

Men  and  brethken, — You  have  heard  what  has  been  said  to 
your  pastor  elect  and  the  exhortation  to  him,  to  preach  the  truth. 
If  he  be  bound  to  preach  the  truth,  you  are  bound  to  hear,  re- 
ceive and  obey  it.  If  he  shall  faithfully  preach  it,  he  will  be  ac- 
cepted by  his  God  and  Judge,  whether  you  hear  or  forbear. 
You  are  now  to  have  another  pastor  set  over  you  in  the  Lord. 
This  is  one  of  the  gifts  which  Christ  has  received  and  which  he 
dispenses  in  consequence  of  his  ascension  ;  and  you  are  account- 
able for  the  manner  in  which  you  shall  improve  by  this  gift. 
Your  pastor  is  to  be  a  watchman  on  this  part  of  the  walls  of  Je- 
rusalem, to  give  warning  to  you.  If  he  shall  faithfully  warn  you 
and  you  shall  not  hear  nor  regard,  your  blood  will  be  on  your 
own  heads.  But  if  you  shall  hear  and  comply,  you  shall  live. 
Therefore  take  heed  how  you  hear.  "  Incline  your  ear  and  come 
unto  Christ.  Hear  and  your  souls  shall  live  ;  and  he  will  make 
with  you  an  everlasting  covenant,  even  the  sure  mercies  of  Da- 
vid." 


SERMON  XIII. 


THE  MINISTER'S  PARTING  COUNSEL.* 

2  Corinthians  13 :  2.  —  Finally,  brethren^  farewell :  Be  perfect,  he  of  good 
comfort,  be  of  one  mind,  live  in  peace  ;  and  the  God  of  love  and  peace  shxtll 
he  ivith  you. 

Corinth  was  a  famous  city  of  Greece,  in  which  the  gospel 
was  introduced  and  established  by  the  apostle  Paul.  There  he 
exercised  his  ministry  for  a  year  and  six  months  at  one  time,  be- 
sides his  occasional  visits  afterward.  And  there  that  ministry 
was  attended  with  great  success.  All  this  appears,  as  from  other 
passages  in  the  New  Testament,  so  particularly  from  Acts  18:  9, 
10,  11,  "Then  spake  the  Lord  to  Paul  in  the  night  by  a  vision, 
Be  not  afraid,  but  speak,  and  hold  not  thy  peace.  For  I  am  with 
thee,  and  no  man  shall  set  on  thee,  to  hurt  thee  :  for  I  have 
much  people  in  this  city.  And  he  continued  there  a  year  and 
six  months,  teaching  the  word  of  God  among  them."  To  this 
church  planted  by  the  apostle  himself,  he  wrote  two  epistles,  of 
which  this  from  which  our  text  is  taken  is  the  last.  At  the  close 
of  this  epistle,  he  takes  his  final  leave  of  this  church,  in  the  af- 
fecting words  of  the  text.  As  if  he  had  said,  And  now,  brethren, 
after  all  my  acquaintance  with  you,  which  has  been  mutually  so 
agreeable  and  profitable ;  after  all  my  labors  among  you,  which 
God  has  been  pleased  so  greatly  to  bless ;  and  after  my  repeated 
visits  and  epistles  to  you  ;  I  bid  you  an  aft'ectionate  and  final 
farewell.  I  ardently  wish  you  prosperity  in  every  respect ;  and 
particularly  that  you  may  "  be  perfect,  be  of  good  comfort,  be  of 
one  mind,  live  in  peace,  and  then  the  God  of  love  and  peace  shall 
be  with  you." 

What  I  propose  in  this  discourse,  is  to  consider  the  several 
parts  of  this  farewell  of  the  apostle,  to  the  Corinthians. 

I.  He  ivishes  them  to  be  perfect. 

We  are  not  to  understand  here  absolute,  sinless  perfection. 
This  is  not  attainable  in  this  life.     "  There  is  not"  even  "  a  just 

*  A  Farewell  Sermon  to  die  people  of  Colebrook,  preached  July  14, 
1799,  and  pi'inted  at  the  request  of  the  hearers. 


THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  225 

man  upon  earth  ;  that  doeth  good  and  sinneth  not,"  Eccles.  7: 
20.  "  And  who  can  say,  I  have  made  my  heart  clean  ;  I  am  pure 
from  my  sin,"  Prov.  20:  9.  "  Who  can  bring  a  clean  thing  out 
of  an  unclean?  Not  one,"  Job  14:  4.  But  if  any  man  has  at- 
tained to  perfection  in  this  life,  he  is  a  just  man  upon  earth,  that 
doeth  good  and  sinneth  not ;  he  is  pure  from  his  sin  ;  he  is  a 
clean  thing  brought  out  of  an  unclean  ;  in  direct  contradiction  to 
the  scriptures  just  quoted. 

If  any  person  ever  has  attained  to  perfection  in  this  life,  we 
may  surely  suppose,  that  some  of  the  saints  mentioned  in  scrip- 
ture, were  favored  with  this  privilege.  Therefore  let  us  search 
for  perfection  among  the  most  distinguished  saints  of  both  the 
Old  Testament  and  the  New.  Noah,  Daniel  and  Job  are  in 
scripture  mentioned  as  eminent  saints  and  as  peculiarly  beloved 
of  God.  Let  us  attend  to  them  distinctly.  Noah,  though  dis- 
tinguished from  the  rest  of  the  world  in  being  saved  from  the 
flood  and  in  being  employed  as  a  preacher  of  righteousness  to  the 
old  world,  and  though  in  the  main  he  walked  with  God,  yet  was 
overtaken  with  gross  intemperance,  as  you  cannot  but  remember. 
Job  was  indeed  an  eminently  good  man,  so  that  there  was  none 
Hke  him  in  all  the  earth,  and  for  a  long  time  he  persevered  in  his 
patience,  vnder  various  most  distressing  afflictions,  brought  on 
him  in  a  rapid  succession,  and  for  a  long  time  he  conducted  him- 
self in  the  most  humble  and  pious  manner,  "  falling  down  to  the 
ground  and  worshipping ;"  saying,  "naked  came  I  out  of  my 
mother's  womb  and  naked  shall  I  return.  The  Lord  gave,  and 
the  Lord  hath  taken  away  ;  and  blessed  be  the  name  of  the 
Lord."  And  when  he  was  insulted  by  his  own  wife,  because  he 
still  retained  his  integrity,  and  refused  to  curse  God  and  die,  he 
made  the  following  most  proper  and  pious  answer  ;  "  What  ? 
shall  we  receive  good  at  the  hand  of  the  Lord,  and  shall  we  not 
receive  evil."  Yet  to  show,  that  there  is  no  man  upon  earth, 
though  really  just  and  upright,  who  liveth  and  sinneth  not,  Job 
at  last  had  his  patience  exhausted,  so  that  he  "  opened  his  mouth 
and  cursed  his  day." 

With  regard  to  Daniel,  though  no  particular  gross  sin  is  in 
scripture  recorded  concerning  him,  yet  we  have  no  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  he  was  more  perfect  than  the  other  two  saints,  with 
whom  he  is  classed  in  scripture,  as  a  distinguished  favorite  of 
God.  Abraham  was  the  father  of  the  faithful,  and  the  friend  of 
God  ;  yet  he  was  not  sinless ;  he  felt  into  polygamy  and  lived  in 
it  for  a  long  time.  As  to  David,  in  general  a  man  after  God's 
own  heart,  you  know  the  great  sins  into  which  he  fell.  Moses 
was  a  distinguished  saint,  and  the  meekest  of  men  ;  yet  he  trans- 

VoL.  IL  20 


226  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

grossed  at  the  waters  of  Meribah,  so  that  he  was  shut  out  of  the 
good  land. 

But  let  us  come  to  the  New  Testament.  The  eleven  apostles, 
from  their  constant  attendance  on  the  preaching  and  miracles  of 
our  Lord,  and  from  their  daily  conversation  and  intimate  inter- 
course with  him,  were  under  great  advantages  for  christian  edi- 
fication. Yet  they  fell  short  of  perfection.  For  when  the  multi- 
tudes from  the  chief  priests  and  elders,  came  with  swords  and 
staves,  to  take  Jesus,  his  disciples  "  all  forsook  him  and  fled." 
Paul  was  the  great  apostle  of  the  gentiles,  was  "  not  a  whit  be- 
hind the  very  chiefest  apostles ;"  was  "  a  chosen  vessel  to  God, 
to  bear  his  name  before  the  gentiles  and  kings,  and  the  children 
of  Israel ;"  and  appears  to  have  done  more  to  spread  the  gospel 
in  the  world,  than  any  of  the  other  apostles  ;  yet  according  to 
his  own  testimony,  he  came  short  of  perfection.  His  language 
is,  Phil.  3:  12 — 15,  "Not  as  though  I  had  already  attained, 
either  were  already  perfect ;  but  I  follow  after,  if  that  I  may  ap- 
prehend that  for  which  also  I  am  apprehended  of  Christ  Jesus. 
Brethren,  I  count  not  myself  to  have  apprehended  ;  but  this  one 
thing  I  do,  forgetting  those  things  which  are  behind,  and  reach- 
ing forth  unto  those  things  which  are  before,  I  press  toward  the 
mark,  for  the  prize  of  the  high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus." 
This  you  see  is  an  express  confession  of  his  own  imperfection. 
The  same  thing  is  manifest  from  this,  that  when  the  apostle, 
"  would  do  good,  evil  was  present  with  him  ;"  and  that  "  he  had 
a  law  in  his  members  warring  against  the  law  of  his  mind,  and 
bringing  him  into  captivity  to  the  law  of  sin,  which  was  in  his 
members."  This  surely  is  not  the  description  of  a  perfect  man. 
If  it  should  be  said,  as  it  has  been,  that  the  apostle  is  here  de- 
scribing his  state  before  his  conversion  and  not  after  ;  I  answer, 
that  in  the  same  context,  and  even  in  the  next  words  he  declares, 
that  he  "  delighted  in  the  law  of  God,  after  the  inward  man  ;" 
and  that  "  with  the  mind  he  served  the  lav/  of  God  ;"  which  no 
unconverted  man  does  ;  because  "  the  carnal  mind  is  enmity 
against  God,  and  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  in- 
deed can  be."  And  if  it  were  otherwise ;  if  an  unconverted 
man  could  delight  in  the  law  of  God,  after  the  inward  man,  he 
could  and  would  of  course  delight  in  God  himself,  and  love  him 
sincerely.  And  if  he  could  serve  the  law  of  God  ;  he  would  of 
course  serve  God  himself.  And  what  is  there  more  difficult  in 
any  part  of  religion,  or  more  distinguishing  of  its  truth  and  gen- 
uineness, than  the  sincere  love  and  service  of  the  law  and  of 
God  himself?  Indeed  this  is  the  root  of  all  true  religion  and 
virtually  constitutes  the  whole. 


THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  227 

Thus  we  have  taken  a  view  of  the  most  eminent  saints  of  scrip- 
ture, and  find  none  among  them  all,  who  profess  to  have  attain- 
ed to  perfection  ;  and  concerning  most  of  them,  we  find  evident 
proofs  of  imperfection.  They  manifestly  fell  short  of  sinless 
perfection.  13ut  if  this  be  so,  it  may  be  said  ;  if  sinless  perfec- 
tion be  not  attainable  in  this  life,  what  does  the  apostle  mean  in 
our  text ;  when  he  exhorts  the  Corinthians  to  be  perfect  1 

I  answer,  he  doubtless  means  the  same  as  is  intended,  when  it 
is  said  of  Job,  that  "  he  was  perfect  and  upright,  and  one  that 
feared  God  and  eschewed  evil."  By  what  has  been  already  ob- 
served, it  appears,  that  Job  was  not  sinlessly  perfect,  as  he  curs- 
ed Jiis  day.  It  must  mean  therefore,  that  he  was  a  truly  good 
man,  a  sincere  servant  of  God,  a  real  saint.  In  the  same  sense 
we  are  told,  "  All  scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and  is 
profitable  for  doctrine,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction 
in  righteousness,  that  the  man  of  God  may  be  perfect,  thorougli- 
ly  furnished  unto  all  good  works."  This  means  either  the  same 
sincerity,  to  which  Job  attained,  or  a  perfection  of  furniture,  a 
being  thoroughly  farnished  to  all  good  works  ;  and  the  latter 
clause  may  be  understood  as  explanatory  of  the  former.  In  this 
sense  the  apostle  Paul,  after  his  express  renunciation  of  perfec- 
tion, as  to  himself ;  yet  assumes  it  to  himself  and  some  of  his  fel- 
low christians  ;  as  you  may  see  in  Phil.  3:  15,  "  Let  us  therefore, 
as  many  as  be  perfect,  be  thus  minded  ;  and  if  in  anything  ye  be 
otherwise  minded,  God  shall  reveal  even  this  unto  you  ;"  plainly 
showing,  that  the  apostle  uses  the  word  perfection  in  a  very  dif- 
ferent sense,  when  he  assumes  it  to  himself,  from  that  in  which 
he  had  used  it,  when  he  renounced  it. 

Therefore  when  the  apostle  in  the  text  exhorts  us  to  be  per- 
fect, he  exhorts  as  to  the  perfection  of  Job,  to  the  integrity  and 
sincerity  of  vital  Christianity  ;  he  exhorts  us  to  live  up  to  our  pro- 
fession, to  live  in  character,  to  be  real  and   exemplary  christians. 

II.   The  apostle  tells  the  Corinthians,  to  be  of  good  comfort. 

Good  comfort  naturally  follows  from  the  perfection  before  de- 
scribed. If  we  be  real  christians,  humble  penitents  and  cordial 
believers  in  Christ ;  if  we  live  in  character,  and  make  proper  pro- 
ficiency in  our  christian  course,  leading  an  exemj)lary  life,  so  as 
to  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God  our  Savior  ;  no  doubt  we  shall  en- 
joy comforts.  There  is  peace  and  comfort  in  the  very  exercise 
of  christian  grace.  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against  God,  not 
subject  to  his  law,  neither  indeed  can  be.  Therefore  so  long  as 
we  are  in  our  native  state  of  depravity,  we  are  in  a  state  of  war- 
fare and  opposition  to  God.  The  carnal  or  native  mind  of  man 
is  opposition  itself  to  God  ;  and  such  a  temper  of  mind  is  direct- 


228  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

ly  opposed  to  peace  and  comfort.  "  The  wicked,"  says  Isaiah, 
"  are  Hke  the  troubled  sea,  when  it  cannot  rest,  whose  waters 
cast  up  mire  and  dirt.  There  is  no  peace,  saith  my  God,  to  the 
wicked."  But  no  sooner  is  the  heart  changed  by  divine  grace, 
than  instead  of  enmity,  reconcihation,  submission,  and  cordial 
and  supreme  love  to  God  are  introduced  and  established  in  it. 
Of  course  then  it  enjoys  peace  and  comfort.  Cordial  submission 
and  reconciliation  are  in  their  very  nature  placid,  peaceful  and 
comfortable. 

And  as  peace  and  comfort  are  implied  in  the  first  exercises  of 
the  new  convert ;  so  they  increase  as  he  increases  in  grace. 
The  very  knowledge  of  God,  of  his  law  and  of  divine  truth,  af- 
fords him  delight  and  comfort,  and  the  more  his  knowledge  is 
increased,  the  more  are  his  delight  and  comfort  increased.  The 
same  may  be  said  of  his  increase  in  humility,  submission  to  God, 
complacency  in  him,  faith  in  Christ,  and  every  other  grace.  The 
very  existence  of  sanctification  in  any  person,  and  especially  as 
it  will  produce  good  fruit  both  in  heart  and  life,  is  attended  with 
comfort  and  happiness.  "  The  ways  of  wisdom  are,"  in  their 
own  nature,  "  ways  of  pleasantness,  and  all  her  paths  peace." 

Besides  this,  sanctification  is  the  evidence  of  our  justification, 
and  in  this  view  is  attended  with  additional  comfort.  You  are  not 
to  imagine,  my  brethren,  that  you  are  to  obtain  evidence  of  your 
pardon  and  justification,  by  any  immediate  revelation  from  hea- 
ven, by  any  suggestion  thrown  into  your  mind,  that  you  are  par- 
doned and  accepted  by  God  ;  or  by  any  text  of  scripture  brought 
to  your  thoughts  however  suddenly,  unexpectedly  and  undesign- 
edly by  yourselves.  All  such  grounds  of  comfort  and  belief  that 
you  are  pardoned,  are  delusive.  The  word  of  God  gives  not  the 
least  warrant  to  trust  to  them.  Where  in  all  the  scripture,  do 
you  find  it  said,  that  they  who  have  an  involuntary  suggestion, 
that  they  are  converted  and  pardoned,  are  in  reality  converted 
and  pardoned.  Where  do  you  find  it  said,  He  that  has  a  text  of 
scripture  unexpectedly  coming  to  his  mind,  importing  that  his 
sins  are  forgiven,  is  really  forgiven  of  God  ?  The  scriptural  evi- 
dences of  conversion  and  forgiveness,  are  such  as  these  :  *'  He 
that  bclieveth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved ;"  "  repent  ye 
therefore  and  be  converted,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out ;" 
*'  I  love  them  that  love  me,  and  those  that  seek  me  early  shall 
find  me  ;"  "  Hope  maketh  not  ashamed  because  the  love  of  God 
is  shed  abroad  in  our  hearts  ;"  "  We  know  that  we  have  passed 
from  death  unto  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren  ;"  "  If  ye  con- 
tinue in  my  word,  then  are  ye  my  disciples  indeed  ;"  "  Ye  are 
my  friends,  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you."     These 


.    THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  229 

evidences  imply  santification  of  heart  and  life  ;  and  to  depend 
on  anything  else,  than  what  implies  sanctificalion  as  an  evidence 
of  our  justification,  is  unwarrantable  and  delusive. 

I  have  insisted  the  more  particularly  on  this,  because  it  has 
pleased  the  great  Head  of  the  church  graciously  to  visit  you  with 
the  effusions  of  his  Holy  Spirit,  hopefully  to  bring  some  of  you  to 
the  saving  knowledge  of  the  trutli,  and  to  awaken  and  convice 
others  ;  and  to  be  informed  what  is  the  proper  evidence  of  a  real 
conversion,  is  at  such  a  time  peculiarly  necessary.  I  wish  you  to 
apply  what  I  have  now  said  on  this  subject  to  the  faithful  and 
candid  trial  of  yourselves. 

'To  be  perfect,  then,  in  the  sense  already  described,  affords 
comfort,  not  only  as  it  implies  a  placid  and  peaceful  temper  of 
mind  toward  God,  complacency  in  God,  etc.  but  as  it  affords  evi- 
dence, and  the  only  real  evidence,  of  our  acceptance  with  God, 
and  of  our  sure  title,  by  the  promises  of  the  gospel,  to  the  future 
eternal  inheritance  of  heaven  and  glory. 

This  must  certainly  be  a  great  source  of  comfort  to  every  chris- 
tian. Thus  he  enjoys  peace  with  God  through  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  On  his  part  he  is  at  peace  with  God,  as  by  regeneration 
his  heart  is  reconciled  to  God  and  subjected  to  his  will ;  and 
God  on  his  part  is  at  peace  with  him,  as  for  Christ's  sake  he  is 
reconciled  to  him,  pardons  his  sins,  adopts  him  and  makes  him 
an  heir  of  himself.  What  a  source  of  comfort  must  these  things 
be  to  the  real  christian  ! 

Besides,  in  this  way  he  enjoys  peace  of  conscience.  Just  so 
far  as  a  man  is  sanctified,  sin,  the  very  foundation  of  the  accusa- 
tions of  an  angry  conscience,  is  prevented  or  removed  ;  and  in 
consequence  of  sanctification,  the  foundation  of  accusing  and 
condemning  himself  as  an  enemy  to  God,  a  rejecter  of  Christ, 
and  an  unconverted  sinner,  is  removed ;  therefore  in  the  same 
respects,  he  has  a  foundation  to  enjoy  peace  of  conscience  and 
comfort  in  his  own  mind. 

Nor  is  this  all ;  the  true  christian  is  comforted  by  all  the  prom- 
ises of  the  gospel,  that  Christ  will  never  leave  nor  forsake  any  of 
his  real  disciples  ;  that  he  will  be  with  them  always,  that  he  will 
so  defend  them  that  none  shall  be  able  to  pluck  them  out  of  his 
hand  ;  that  he  will  support  and  protect  his  church  even  to  the 
end  of  the  world,  so  that  the  gates  of  hell  shall  not  be  able  to 
prevail  against  it ;  that  he  will  increase  and  promote  true  re- 
ligion in  the  world  ;  that  Satan's  kingdom  shall  be  overthrown ; 
that  Christ  shall  generally  reign  on  the  earth,  and  the  greatness 
of  the  kingdom  under  the  whole  heaven  shall  be  given  to  the 
people  of  the  saints  of  the  most  high  God ;  that  the  whole  earth 

20* 


230  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

shall  be  full  of  the  knowledge  of  the  Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the 
seas  ;  and  that  finally  the  kingdom  of  grace,  which  took  its  orig- 
inal from  heaven,  shall  be  transplanted  to  heaven,  its  native  soil, 
and  shall  there  eternally  flourish  in  perfect  rest,  peace,  holiness, 
and  happiness,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father. 

All  these  considerations  are  replete  with  comfort  to  real  chris- 
tians. No  wonder  then  they  are  exhorted  to  be  of  good  comfort. 
They  have  reason  for  comfort,  under  the  greatest  afliictions  and 
persecutions,  that  ever  they  are  called  to  endure. 

III.   The  apostle  exhorts  the  Corinthians  to  he  of  one  mind. 

This  is  of  great  importance  in  every  community,  and  especially 
in  every  christian  church  or  society.  They  ought  to  be  of  one 
mind  in  several  respects. 

1.  As  to  their  articles  of  faith.  Articles  of  faith,  or  at  best 
articles  of  infidelity,  will  naturally  govern  the  temper  and  prac- 
tice. He  who  believes  there  is  no  God,  will  not  love  and  wor- 
ship him.  He  who  believes  that  Christ  is  not  the  Savior,  will  not 
trust  in  him  for  salvation.  He  who  believes  not  in  a  future  state 
of  rewards  and  punishments,  will  not  prepare  for  it.  He  who  be- 
lieves not  the  gospel  to  be  true,  will  not  be  anxious  to  comply 
with  it.  He  who  believes  that  there  is  nothing  in  religion,  will 
not  embrace,  love,  and  practise  it.  If  then  any  people  be  not  of 
one  mind  in  these  respects,  how  can  they  walk  together  ? 

Or  if  they  differ  in  things  on  which  the  very  existence  of  all 
religion  does  not  depend  ;  still  even  this  diversity  of  sentiment 
produces  discord  and  is  very  hurtful.  For  instance,  if  some  be- 
lieve the  total  depravity  of  human  nature,  but  others  believe  that 
we  naturally  have  some  good  principles  in  us  ;  if  some  believe  the 
sovereignty  of  divine  grace,  that  God  has  a  right  to  cast  off  all 
men,  and  would  do  them  no  injustice  if  he  should  make  them 
eternally  miserable ;  while  others  believe  either  that  no  man  de- 
serves eternal  misery,  or  that  those  who  are  moral  and  attend  on 
the  means  of  grace,  ought  not  to  be  finally  rejected  ;  if  some  be- 
lieve the  entire  and  total  dependence  of  man  upon  God,  and  his 
grace  ;  while  others  think  we  have  a  self-determining  power  in 
our  wills,  which  is  entirely  sufficient  for  repentance  and  all  the 
exercises  of  religion  ;  if  some  believe  the  great  importance,  use- 
fulness and  necessity  of  public  worship  on  the  sabbath  ;  while 
others  think  they  can  spend  the  sabbath  as  profitably  at  their  own 
homes  ;  if  some  believe  in  the  necessity  and  indispensable  obliga- 
tion of  a  virtuous  and  pious  education  of  their  children,  while 
others  are  impressed  with  no  such  ideas ;  if  some  believe  them- 
selves bound  to  submit  cheerfully  to  the  expense  necessary  to 
support  both  the  public  worship  of  the  sabbath,  and  the  schools 


Tttfi  minister's  parting  counsel.  231 

ftfecessary  for  the  due  education  of  their  children,  but  others 
grudge  every  part  of  this  expense  ;  you  cannot  but  see,  that  this 
diversity  of  sentiment  must  work  disorder  and  confusion,  and 
finally,  tend  to  the  ruin  of  any  society. 

2.  They  ought  to  be  of  one  mind  in  their  aims  and  ends. 
What  if  some  aim  at  the  glory  of  God,  others  at  their  own  glory 
and  applause  ?  What  if  some  aim  at  the  promotion  of  true  reli- 
gion and  the  interest  of  Christ,  and  others,  at  the  promotion  of 
their  own  interest  merely  ?  What  if  some  are  willing  to  deny 
themselves  and  their  own  interest  or  applause,  for  the  sake  of 
Christ  and  his  cause,  but  others  set  up  themselves  as  supreme, 
and  make  religion  itself  subservient  to  their  private  ends  ?  It  is 
manifest,  that  the  religious  concerns  of  such  a  people  cannot  pro- 
ceed with  success.  As  soon  as  ever  religion  proves  not  to  be  sub- 
servient to  their  applause,  their  ambitiort  or  their  private  ends,  a 
part  of  them  forsake  and  oppose  it ;  they  oppose  therewith  Chris- 
tianity and  oppose  Christ  himself.  And  how  can  we  expect  any 
good  to  the  cause  of  religion  and  virtue,  in  such  a  course  of  things 
as  this  ?     This  shows  the  necessity  of  being  of  one  mind. 

3.  It  is  equally  necessary  that  a  people  be  united  in  their  mea- 
sures to  support  or  promote  religion.  Suppose  all  the  individu- 
als of  any  community  are  agreed  to  aim  at  the  divine  glory  and 
the  advancement  of  virtue  and  piety  ;  yet  if  they  pursue  different 
paths  and  take  different  measures,  to  secure  these  ends ;  if  one 
be  of  Paul,  and  another  of  ApoUos ;  if  while  all  are  wishing  to 
settle  a  minister,  one  choose  to  settle  this  man  and  another  that, 
and  each  be  fixed  in  his  own  measures ;  what  can  be  done  in  this 
case  ?     The  great  end  will  doubtless  be  lost. 

In  these  things  there  must  be  mutual  condescension  ;  and  in 
the  case  now  described  there  can  be  condescension.  It  is  sup- 
posed, that  all  are  seeking  the  same  end  ;  and  when  the  general- 
ity are  agreed  in  the  measures  to  secure  this  end ;  for  instance, 
the  settlement  of  a  particular  minister ;  and  wise  men  in  the  so- 
ciety and  out  of  it,  judge  it  best  for  the  society,  that  he  should 
be  settled  ;  in  this  case  one  or  two  individuals  should  rather  con- 
descend and  fall  in  with  the  wishes  of  the  society  in  general,  than 
that  the  society  should  submit  to  them,  or  be  broken  in  pieces. 
Unless  there  be  condescension  in  some  such  cases,  no  people  can 
enjoy  peace  and  success  in  their  religious  concerns. 

IV.   The  apostle  exhorts  the  Corinthians  to  live  in  peace. 

Peace  follows  of  course  from  what  the  apostle  had  before  en- 
joined. There  is  no  danger  that  they  who  agree  in  the  articles 
of  their  faith  and  religious  sentiments,  in  their  aims  and  ends,  and 
in  their  measures  to  obtain  those  ends ;  will  fall  into  contention 


232  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

concerning  religion.  And  how  happy  is  religious  peace  !  How 
comfortable  to  the  church  and  society  !  How  comfortable  to  their 
minister  !  How  favorable  to  the  advancement  of  the  knowledge 
of  the  truth,  to  the  love  and  practice  of  it,  and  to  the  increase  of 
true  and  real  religion  !  On  the  contrary,  how  disagreeable  is  it 
to  live  in  contention  !  How  uncomfortable  to  the  church,  to  the 
society  and  to  the  minister  !  How  unfavorable  to  the  increase  of 
religious  knowledge,  virtue  and  piety  !  It  is  directly  opposed  to 
both  morality  and  piety,  and  cannot  proceed  from  them,  but  from 
the  want  of  them  ;  or  rather  from  that  which  is  directly  opposed 
to  them.  "  Whence  come  wars  and  fightings  among  you  ?  Come 
they  not  hence,  even  from  your  lusts  which  war  against  the 
spirit?" 

But  however  uncomfortable  and  hurtful  contention  is,  we  may 
expect  it,  unless  we  be  of  one  mind  in  the  forementioned  respects. 
If  every  one  be  strenuous  for  his  own  peculiar  opinions,  his  own 
ends  and  his  own  measures,  there  can  be  no  peace  in  any  society. 
And  there  is  great  danger  of  this  from  various  causes.  One 
source  of  danger  is  the  natural  liberty  and  independence  of  man. 
As  every  blessing  and  privilege  is  capable  of  abuse,  so  this  is  true 
with  regard  to  personal  liberty.  As  men  feel  themselves  free  and 
in  many  repects  independent,  some  are  apt  to  indulge  this  inde- 
pendence in  adopting  peculiar  opinions,  and  in  pursuing  peculiar 
ends  and  peculiar  measures.  Some  from  vanity  aflect  singulari- 
ty. They  wish  to  distinguish  themselves,  and  they  cannot  do  it 
any  other  way  so  easily  as  by  setting  up  for  peculiar  opinions, 
ends  or  measures.  Thus  they  afTect  to  show  themselves  wiser 
than  other  men.  The  head  of  a  party  is  always  distinguished, 
and  to  be  in  such  a  situation  is  flattering  to  human  vanity.  From 
this  motive  some  put  themselves  at  the  head  of  a  party  however 
erroneous ;  and  to  gratify  their  ambition,  they  will  rend  the  soci- 
ety to  which  they  belong  in  pieces,  and  destroy  all  peace,  all  or- 
der, and  all  good. 

V.  On  certain  conditions,  the  apostle  promises  the  Corinthi- 
ans, that  the  God  of  love  and  peace  would  he  with  them. 

The  conditions  are,  that  they  be  perfect,  of  good  comfort,  of 
one  mind,  and  that  they  live  in  peace.  And  if  we  comply  with 
these  conditions,  God  will  be  with  us  in  several  respects. 

1.  He  will  be  with  us  by  the  presence  of  his  grace  in  our 
hearts.  All  who  comply  with  those  conditions,  are  truly  gracious 
persons,  are  the  subjects  of  divine  grace  communicated  in  sancti- 
fication,  by  the  spirit  of  God,  and  God  by  his  grace  and  Holy 
Spirit  habitually  dwells  in  them.  In  this  respect  he  never  leaves 
them  nor  forsakes  them,  but  is  with  them  to  the  end  of  their  lives. 


THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  233 

2.  If  we  comply  with  the  forementioned  conditions,  God  will 
be  with  us,  in  the  way  of  divine  consolation.  This  is  the  natu- 
ral consequence  of  the  former  particular.  It  is  implied  in  what 
has  been  already  said,  that  divine  grace  is  comforting  in  its  very 
nature,  as  it  implies  love  to  God,  to  the  law  of  God,  and  to  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  as  it  implies  faith,  truth  and  hope  in  Christ, 
and  as  it  implies  love  to  mankind  ;  all  which  are  agreeable,  pleas- 
ant and  comforting  emotions.  That  it  is  comforting,  as  it  im- 
plies the  subduing  of  native  depravity,  which  is  ever  turbulent 
and  opposed  to  peace  and  comfort ;  and  as  it  gives  evidence  of 
future  grace  and  support  here,  and  of  eternal  glory  hereafter. 

3.  On  the  same  conditions  God  will  be  with  us  in  the  way  of 
protection.  He  will  keep  us  even  as  the  apple  of  his  eye ;  he 
will  never  leave  us  nor  forsake  us,  and  never  deliver  us  up  into 
the  hands  of  our  spiritual  foes,  who  seek  our  ruin.  As  he  really 
is,  so  he  will  act  as  the  captain  of  our  salvation,  and  afford  us  the 
most  effectual  aid,  in  times  of  need.  Nay,  he  will  make  all  things 
to  work  together  for  our  good  ;  for  this  is  his  express  promise  to 
them  that  love  God.  And  though  we  may  fall  into  various  tem- 
poral evils,  from  these  we  shall  be  recovered,  and  those  evils  them- 
selves shall  be  made  to  work  together  for  our  good. 

4.  God  will  be  with  us  to  build  us  up  in  faith  and  holiness. 
"  The  path  of  the  just  is  as  the  shining  light,  which  shineth  more 
and  more  unto  the  perfect  day."  We  need  the  same  communi- 
cations of  grace  to  build  us  up  in  holiness,  as  in  the  first  instance 
to  regenerate  our  hearts ;  and  this  we  shall  receive  on  the  condi- 
tions specified  in  the  text. 

5.  God  will  be  with  us,  to  prepare  us  for  glory  and  to  receive 
us  to  it.  He  will  never  suffer  any  who  are  once  the  subjects  of 
grace,  to  fail  of  glory.  "  Whom  he  did  foreknow,  he  also  did 
predestinate  to  be  conformed  to  the  image  of  his  Son  ;  and  whom 
he  did  predestinate,  them  he  also  called ;  and  whom  he  called, 
them  he  also  justified  ;  and  whom  he  justified,  them  he  also  glo- 
rified." "  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the  love  of  Christ?  Shall 
tribulation,  or  distress,  or  persecution,  or  famine,  or  nakedness, 
or  peril,  or  sword  ?  Nay  in  all  these  things  we  are  more  than  con- 
querors,' through  him  that  loved  us.  For  I  am  persuaded,  that 
neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels,  nor  principalities,  nor  powers, 
nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor 
any  other  creature,  shall  be  able  to  separate  us  from  the  love  of 
God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord." 

I  shall  now  apply  these  general  observations  to  the  present  oc- 
casion. For  several  years  past,  I  have  been  with  you  laboring  in 
the  ministry,  endeavoring  to  instruct  you  in  the  great  and  most 


234  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

important  doctrines  of  the  gospe],  to  inculcate  its  duties,  to  ex- 
cite you  to  the  practice  of  tiiem,  and  to  warn  you  against  every 
error,  sin  and  vice.  My  connection  with  you  has  been  peaceful, 
agreeable,  and  of  late  I  hope  successful.  I  expected  to  continue 
and  spend  the  rest  of  my  days  with  you.  And  as  the  proposal 
of  my  leaving  you  was  no  object  of  my  seeking ;  so  it  has  been 
attended  with  great  anxiety  concerning  my  duty.  As  the  best 
expedient  in  the  case,  and  the  most  likely  means  of  obtaining 
light  as  to  the  way  of  duty,  the  whole  question  concerning  my  re- 
moval has,  as  you  well  know,  been  submitted  to  a  council  mu- 
tually agreeable  to  us  both.  You  know  the  result  of  the  council ; 
it  was  their  unanimous  opinion,  that  it  was  my  duty  to  accept 
the  call,  which  invites  me  to  leave  you,  and  your  duty  to  ac- 
quiesce. 

Had  they  decided,  that  I  ought  to  continue  with  you,  I  should 
have  complied  with  their  decision,  in  a  conviction,  that  in  that 
case,  I  should  enjoy  far  more  ease ;  more  leisure,  more  retirement 
and  more  opportunity  to  prosecute  my  favorite  study  of  theology, 
to  indulge  many  agreeable  propensities  and  to  enjoy  many  of  my 
most  agreeable  friends,  whose  society  must  be  lost  by  my  removal. 
And  now  that  they  have  decided  it  to  be  my  duty  to  accept  a 
call  to  a  distant  place,  I  feel  myself  obliged  to  comply  with  their 
decision,  though  with  great  reluctance  to  leaving  this  dear  people, 
especially  at  the  present  juncture,  at  which  it  has  pleased  the 
great  Head  of  the  church  to  afford  his  influences  among  us  ;  and 
in  the  prospect  of  labor,  anxiety,  responsibility  and  perhaps  diffi- 
culty, in  the  undertaking  to  which  I  am  invited.  Yet  since  it  is 
by  proper  judges  decided  to  be  my  duty,  I  shall  take  upon  me 
this  arduous  service,  and  discharge  the  obligations  of  it,  accord- 
ing to  my  best  ability,  looking  to  God  to  assist  and  support  me. 

Since  we  must  part,  what  is  more  proper,  than  we  part  as  Paul, 
and  the  Corinthians  did  ?  After  the  example  of  the  great  apostle 
of  the  gentiles,  I  do  certainly  most  ardently  wish  you  to  be  per- 
fect, to  be  of  good  comfort,  to  be  of  one  mind  and  to  live  in 
peace ;  and  that  you  may  be  animated  so  to  do,  by  the  motive, 
that  then  the  God  of  love  and  peace  shall  be  with  you. 

You  have  heard  what  has  been  said  concerning  the  necessity 
of  unanimity  and  peace  among  yourselves.  And  I  dare  say  you 
realize  it.  Formerly,  you  experienced  the  ill  effects  of  dissen- 
sions. Let  this  your  experience  warn  and  guard  you  against 
everything  of  the  like  kind  in  future.  "  Remembering  your  afflic- 
tion and  your  misery,  the  wormwood  and  the  gall ;  let  your  soul 
still  have  them  in  remembrance,  and  be  humbled  in  you."  Let 
me  beseech  you  to  withstand  the  beginning  of  dissension.     It  is 


1^- 

THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  235 

"  like  tlie  letting  out  of  water ;  once  let  out,  it  is  hard  to  be  stop- 
ped again,  and  the  longer  it  runs,  the  deeper  and  wider  channel 
it  wears,  therefore  leave  off  contention  before  it  is  meddled  with." 

Your  union  among  yourselves,  as  well  as  your  kind  treatment 
of  me,  since  I  have  been  connected  with  you,  has  been  a  source 
of  happiness  to  me.  I  shall  always  remember  you  with  affection, 
gratitude  and  kindest  benevolence.  It  is  a  most  happy  circum- 
stance, that  since  we  must  part,  we  part  not  only  with  peace, 
but  with  entire  mutual  friendship.  This  is  a  singular  case  of  the 
dismission  of  a  minister  from  his  people.  That  you  have  acted 
in  this  whole  affair  with  so  much  candor,  with  so  many  and  so 
unequivocal  testimonies  of  affection  to  me,  and  regard  to  the 
council  which  has  dissolved  our  connection,  has  been  often  no- 
ticed to  your  honor.  I  hope  the  mutual  friendship,  which  has 
uninterruptedly  subsisted  between  us,  will  ever  continue,  and  that 
we  shall  sincerely  remember  each  other  in  our  prayers. 

As  your  minister  is  now  about  to  leave  you,  I  sincerely  pray 
and  hope  that  in  due  time  God  will  send  you  a  good  minister  of 
Jesus  Christ  a  man  full  of  faith  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  that 
under  his  faithful  ministry  much  people  may  be  added  unto  the 
Lord.  And  as  it  has  pleased  God  lately  to  visit  you  with  the  in- 
fluences of  his  Holy  Spirit,  to  the  revival  of  true  religion  among 
you ;  I  presume  you  will  not  be  contented  to  live  long,  without 
so  important  a  blessing,  as  a  christian  minister.  If  you  have 
tasted,  that  the  Lord  is  gracious,  you  will  not  be  willing  to  live 
without  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  and  stated  worship  on  the 
sabbath.  As  new  born  babes  you  will  desire  the  sincere  milk  of 
the  word,  that  ye  may  grow  thereby. 

I  hope,  brethren,  that  in  settling  a  minister,  you  will  be  atten- 
tive to  two  things,  that  he  be  sound  in  the  faith,  and  that  as  far 
as  you  can  judge,  he  be  a  man  of  true  piety.  If  he  be  not  sound 
in  the  faith,  he  will  lead  you  and  your  children  into  error  and 
false  religion ;  and  this  error  and  false  religion  will  naturally  de- 
scend to  future  generations,  and  may  prove  fatal  to  thousands. 
And  if  he  be  not  a  man  of  true  piety,  with  what  sincerity  can  he 
act  in  any  part  of  his  ministry  ?  As  he  will  not  be  friendly  to 
Christ  or  his  cause,  he  will  not  relish  the  truth,  nor  heartily  en- 
gage to  promote  it.  If  he  do  not  directly  oppose  true  religion, 
which  is  the  most  favorable  supposition  ;  still  being  a  blind  leader 
of  the  blind,  he  and  his  hearers  will  be  likely  both  to  fall  into  the 
ditch. 

But  if  you  shall  settle  a  good  and  faithful  minister,  you  will,  so 
far  as  you  yourselves  are  rightly  disposed,  rejoice  in  him  and  in 
his  ministrations  ;  you  will  have  peace  and  be  edified  in  the  most 


236  THE  minister's  parting  counsel. 

holy  faith  ;  and  you  will  have  reason  to  hope,  that  God  will  bless 
his  labors  among  you,  and  extend  the  good  effects  of  such  a  min- 
istry to  generations  yet  unborn. 

How  happy  will  you  be  under  such  a  minister !  How  happy 
will  all  your  friends  be  on  your  behalf!  And  how  happy  shall  I 
be,  to  hear  of  your  prosperity  ! 

And  now,  Brethren,  I  am  to  take  my  leave  of  you.  When 
Paul  took  leave  of  the  elders  of  the  church  of  Ephesus,  "  they 
all  wept  sore,  and  fell  on  Paul's  neck  and  kissed  him,  sorrowing 
most  of  all  for  the  words,  which  he  spake,  that  "  they  should  see 
his  face  no  more.''^  How  it  may  be  with  us,  brethren,  whether 
we  may  ever  be  permitted  to  see  each  other's  face  again  in  this 
world,  God  only  knows.  Therefore  "  finally,  brethren,  farewell." 
It  is  my  heart's  desire  and  prayer  for  you,  that  you  may  prosper 
in  all  your  real  interests  ;  that  you  may  prosper  in  your  several 
lawful  secular  concerns  ;  that  you  may  prosper  as  a  society,  in- 
creasing in  numbers,  wealth,  and  reputation,  and  be  regarded  as 
a  truly  respectable  people,  by  all  around  you ;  that  you  may 
prosper  as  a  church,  established  in  the  faith  and  order  of  the  gos- 
pel, receiving  ''  daily  additions  of  such  as  shall  be  saved ;"  and 
that  you  may  prosper  as  individuals ;  that  every  careless  sinner 
among  you  may  be  thoroughly  awakened  and  convinced ;  that 
every  unregenerate  sinner  may  be  renewed  by  divine  grace  ;  and 
that  every  real  christian  may  "  grow  in  grace  and  in  the  know- 
ledge of  our  Lord  and  Savior  Jesus  Christ ;"  in  one  w^ord,  that 
"  your  souls  may  be  in  health  and  prosper,"  is  my  earnest  prayer 
for  you. 

To  this  end,  let  me  beseech  you  all  to  improve  the  present  fa- 
vorable opportunity.  Now  God  is  shedding  down  his  kind  influ- 
ences among  you,  to  the  awakening  and  conviction  of  many  and 
the  hopeful  conversion  of  some.  Now  then  is  a  happy  oppor- 
tunity to  obtain  the  grace  of  God.  "  Now  is  the  accepted  time  ; 
now  is  the  day  of  salvation."  Should  any  of  you  live  through 
such  a  time  as  this,  and  resist  the  peculiar  and  strong  motives, 
which  are  now  exhibited,  to  become  reconciled  to  God  ;  it  is  not 
likely,  that  the  weaker  motives  of  ordinary  times  will  have  much 
effect  upon  you.  But  you  are  in  the  hands  of  a  sovereign  God,  to 
whom  you  have  forfeited  every  blessing,  and  who  therefore  has  a 
right  to  have  mercy  upon  you,  or  to  leave  you  to  perish  in  your 
sins.  You  are  dependent  on  his  sovereign  grace.  Own  this 
your  dependence ;  and  expect  help  from  no  other  source.  Ac- 
cept the  offered  grace  of  God,  and  lose  not  that  infinite  blessing, 
by  neglect  or  delay. 

"  Take  heed  to  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock,  which  God 


THE  minister's  PARTING  COUNSEL.  237 

hath  purchased  with  his  own  blood."  Take  heed,  that  after  my 
departing  grievous  wolves  do  not  enter  in  among  you,  not  sparing 
the  flock  ;  and  that  of  your  ownselves  men  do  not  arise,  speak- 
ing perverse  things,  to  draw  away  disciples  after  them."  "  Breth- 
ren, I  commend  you  to  God  and  to  the  word  of  his  grace,  which 
is  able  to  build  you  up  and  to  give  you  an  inheritance  among  all 
them,  which  are  sanctified."  May  the  God  of  love  and  peace  be 
with  and  bless  both  you  and  me  respectively  ;  may  he  watch  over, 
protect  and  prosper  us  in  our  several  lawful  ways  ;  and  may  he 
especially  replenish  our  hearts  with  his  grace  and  love.  And 
when  we  shall  have  served  our  generation  according  to  his  will, 
may  we  meet  with  joy  and  mutual  congratulation  before  our 
common  judge,  be  acquitted  and  accepted  by  him,  and  so  may 
we  be  forever  with  the  Lord. 


Vol.  II.  21 


SERMON    XIV. 


SUBailSSION  TO  RULERS.* 

Romans  13: 1,  2. — Let  even/  soid  he  subject  unto  the  higher  potvers.  For  there 
is  no  poiver  but  of  God  :  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  God.  Whoso- 
ever therefore  resisteth  the  power,  resisteth  the  ordinance  of  God. 

The  nature  of  civil  government,  and  the  extent  and  limits  of 
the  authority  of  magistrates,  have  been  so  frequently  and  large- 
ly discussed,  especially  in  later  times,  that  scarce  anything  new 
concerning  them  can  be  said.  Still,  to  be  reminded  of  what  is 
old  and  has  often  been  said,  especially  on  such  important  sub- 
jects, is  by  no  means  without  its  use.  If  therefore  this  shall  be 
all  that  is  done  in  my  present  discourse,  it  will  not  be  in  vain. 

The  sources  of  argument  for  the  exhibition  and  confirmation  of 
\j'  the  truth  as  to  civil  government  are  two,  reason  and  scripture. 
And  of  the  passages  of  scripture  referred  to  by  writers  on  the 
subject,  the  text  is  probably  the  chief.  Now  it  is  of  great  im- 
portance that  we  know  the  scriptural  doctrine  on  these  points. 
For  if  God  has  revealed  his  mind  concerning  the  nature,  extent, 
and  end  of  civil  government,  we  may  be  sure  that  such  a  revela- 
tion is  a  perfect  and  infallible  rule  for  us.  And  as  our  text  is 
supposed  by  many  to  be  the  passage  in  which  above  all  others 
God  has  made  known  his  will  concerning  these  things,  so  we 
are  under  peculiar  obligation,  in  our  inquiries  after  truth  on  these 
subjects,  to  attend  to  it,  and  to  endeavor  by  all  means  to  possess 
ourselves  of  its  true  meaning  and  import.  This  we  now  propose 
to  do. 

The  text  has  been  understood  very  difl:erently  by  different  per- 
sons. Some  suppose  that  in  it  we  have  a  very  plain  precept,  re- 
quiring passive  obedience  and  non-resistance  to  our  rulers  in  all 
cases,  and  especially  to  those  in  supreme  authority.  And  though 
such  rulers  may  do  what  they  will  ;  though  they  oppress  us  ever 
so  much,  and  break  through  all  law,  and  overturn  the  very  foun- 
dations of  our  constitution,  and  tear  from  us  every  right  and  lib- 

*  Preached  at  the  annual  Freemen's  Meeting  for  voting,  etc.  1775.  It 
is  pubHshed,  as  being  in  many  respects  a  curious  and  interesting  "sign  of 
the  times"  in  which  it  was  preached. 


SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS.  239 

erty  whether  civil  or  reHgious  ;  though  they  plunder  our  estates, 
and  sport  themselves  with  our  very  lives,  still  these  persons  sup- 
pose that  we  ought  not  in  the  least  degree  to  oppose  this  the 
wantonness  of  their  tyranny  and  cruelty,  but  patiently  to  submit, 
and  endure  it  all.  Such  persons  further  suppose  that  the  words  of 
the  text  have  a  particular  reference  to  those  who  held  civil  power 
in  the  time  of  the  apostle  ;  that  he  especially  enjoins  submission 
to  them,  though  they  were  some  of  the  most  unjust  and  tyran- 
nical rulers  that  ever  lived  ;  and  that,  consequently,  if  christians 
were  then  obliged  to  submit  and  not  resist,  they  must  be  obliged  to 
do  the  same  in  every  other  case,  as  it  will  rarely  happen  that  they 
will  live  under  rulers  more  tyrannical  than  were  the  Roman  em- 
perors and  their  subordinate  magistrates ;  and  that  as  even  these 
were  ordained  of  God,  and  therefore  their  subjects  were  obliged 
to  submit  to  them  ;  so,  for  the  same  reason,  must  all  subjects,  in 
all  cases,  do  the  same. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  supposed  by  some  that  these  words 
are  well  capable  of  another  construction,  and  will  not  bear  this 
which  has  been  mentioned.  They  hold  that  they  refer  to  those 
civil  rulers  who  rule  justly,  and  according  to  the  laws  and  con- 
stitution of  the  state  ;  and  that  the  apostle  meant  to  limit  what 
he  here  says  by  what  follows,  where  he  tells  us  "  that  rulers  are 
the  ministers  of  God  to  us  for  good  ;  that  they  are  not  a  terror  to 
good  works,  but  to  evil ;  and  that  if  we  do  well,  we  shall  have 
praise  of  them."  It  is  such  rulers  only,  say  they,  that  the  apos- 
tle forbids  us  to  resist. 

Whether  this  be  the  true  sense  or  not,  I  have  not  time  now 
to  argue.  I  would  only  say  that  it  does  not  appear  to  me  to  be 
the  true  sense ;  for  I  cannot  but  think  these  words  were  intend- 
ed to  teach  us  the  general  duty  of  obedience  to  civil  magistrates, 
without  reference  to  any  particular  rulers  whether  Roman  em- 
perors or  others,  and  that  they  were  never  written  with  a  view  to 
determine  the  particular  bounds  and  extent  of  that  obedience.  It 
is  doubtless  true,  and  is  conceded  on  all  hands,  that  it  is  our 
general  duty  to  be  subject  to  the  higher  powers ;  for  there  is  no 
power  but  of  God,  and  the  powers  that  be  are  ordained  of  him. 
He  not  only  expressly  ordained  civil  magistracy  among  his  an- 
cient people  the  Jews  ;  but  by  his  providence,  and  the  light  of 
nature,  and  reason,  he  has  led  mankind  in  general  to  form  them- 
selves into  civil  societies,  under  proper  rulers,  both  supreme  and 
subordinate.  Whosoever,  therefore,  shall  in  ordinary  cases  resist 
the  established  supreme  authority,  resists  the  ordinance  of  God, 
and  is  guilty  before  him. 

All  must  grant  that  to  justify  resistance  and  rebellion  against 


240  SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS. 

the  ruling  powers  in  any  state,  there  must  be  some  extraordinary 
reason.  So  long  as  the  established  powers  rule  according  to  law, 
justice,  and  the  constitution,  none  can  pretend  that  it  is  lawful 
to  resist  them.  Nor  is  every  violation  of  law,  justice,  or  the  con- 
stitution, a  sufficient  reason  of  resistance.  It  must  always  be 
considered  whether  the  evil  consequences  of  resistance  be  not 
likely  to  overbalance  the  good  ;  and  then  only  is  resistance  justi- 
fiable, when  the  rulers  rule  tyrannically,  and  there  is  also  a  good 
prospect  that  the  public  good  will  be  promoted,  more  than  in- 
jured, by  resistance.  But  whether,  even  in  this  case,  resistance 
be  justifiable  or  not,  the  apostle  did  not  mean  expressly  to  deter- 
mine. He  only  gives  the  general  rules  of  obedience  and  sub- 
mission, and  does  not  touch,  one  way  or  the  other,  the  question 
I  have  now  presented. 

We  are  to  understand  this  passage  in  the  very  same  manner 
as  we  would  any  other  passages  on  other  subjects,  expressed  a^ 
this  is,  in  general  and  absolute  terms.  For  instance  in  Matt.  5: 
39,  etc.  it  is  said,  "  But  I  say  unto  you  that  ye  resist  not  evil ; 
but  whosoever  shall  smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him 
the  other  also.  And  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  the  law,  and 
take  away  thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloak  also.  And  whoso- 
ever shall  compel  thee  to  go  a  mile,  go  with  him  twain."  Here 
our  Lord,  in  express  and  absolute  terms,  forbids  all  resistance  ta 
any  private  person  whatsoever,  however  injuriously  and  abusive- 
ly he  may  treat  us,  just  as  the  apostle  in  the  text  forbids  all  resist- 
ance of  the  civil  powers.  But  who  ever  understood  these  words 
in  the  most  literal  and  extensive  sense  ?  Who  ever  supposed  that 
they  make  it  our  duty-  to  suffer  every  ruffian  to  beat  and  mangle 
us  as  much  as  he  may  please  ?  Who  ever  imagined  that  our  Sa- 
vior intended  to  forbid  our  using  means  to  protect  our  property 
from  thieves  and  robbers,  or  to  make  us  the  dupes  of  every  im- 
pertinent and  assuming  villain  who  should  take  it  into  his  head  ta 
command  us  to  go  with  him  a  mile,  or  to  give  up  our  garment  to 
him  ?  I  know,  indeed,  that  the  Quakers  rest  upon  this  passage 
their  doctrine  of  abstaining  from  all  violence.  Yet  I  question 
whether  there  is  a  soul  among  them,  who,  if  he  were  violently 
smitten  on  the  one  cheek,  would  patiently  turn  the  other  to  re- 
ceive a  second  blow,  or  who  would  think  he  was  in  duty  bound 
so  to  do. 

The  truth  is,  that  in  this  passage,  all  resistance  in  case  of  pri- 
vate assault  or  injury,  is  as  much  forbidden,  as  all  resistance  of 
the  supreme  power  is  forbidden  in  the  text.  Nor  is  there  any- 
thing left  on  record,  in  any  other  part  of  the  New  Testament,  to 
justify  such  resistance  in  the  one  case  more  than  in  the  other. 


SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS.  241 

Yet  the  words  quoted,  you  will  all  grant,  are  not  to  be  taken  in 
the  literal  sense.  You  all  hold  that  they  only  contain  the  gene- 
ral rules  of  patience  and  gentleness  under  the  greatest  private 
abuses,  and  teach  us  that  we  should  not  be  forward  to  resist  and 
retaliate  injuries,  but  should  rather,  as  a  general  rule,  patiently 
suffer  wrong.  And  why  may  we  not — why  ought  we  not,  to  put 
the  same  construction  on  these  words  of  the  apostle  ?  Plainly 
we  may  ;  for  there  is  no  more  difficulty  attending  the  construc- 
tion in  the  one  case  than  the  other. 

In  the  same  universal  terms  the  apostle  enjoins  upon  servants 
obedience  to  their  masters.  Col.  3:  22,  "  Servants,  obey  in  all 
things  your  masters  according  to  the  flesh."  What  words  could 
be  more  comprehensive  and  universal  ?  Yet  no  man  will  hold  that 
they  are  to  be  taken  in  their  most  extensive  and  literal  sense. 
For  in  some  cases  we  know,  and  the  apostles  have  taught  us  that 
we  ought  to  obey  God  rather  than  man.  Nor  will  any  hold  that 
servants  are  obliged  to  obey  their  masters  in  all  things  which  are 
not  of  a  religious  nature,  and  wherein  the  rights  of  conscience 
are  not  immediately  concerned.  Suppose  any  of  you  were  taken 
captive  by  our  neighboring  savages,  and  by  them  held  in  a  state 
of  servitude,  and  that  by  resisting  your  master  you  might  regain 
your  liberty  and  return  to  your  family  and  friends  ;  would  you 
in  this  case  feel  yourself  conscientiously  bound  by  this  precept, 
still  to  continue  to  obey  your  master  in  all  things,  and  to  forego 
the  opportunity  to  escape  ?  No  ;  never  !  And  yet  there  is  no 
more  reason  why  we  should  put  such  a  construction  upon  our 
text  than  upon  this  passage. 

Another  instance  that  I  would  mention  is  recorded  in  Matt.  5: 
34,  etc.,  "  But  I  say  unto  you,  swear  not  at  all ;  neither  by  hea- 
ven for  it  is  God's  throne  ;  nor  by  the  earth,  for  it  is  his  footstool ; 
neither  by  Jerusalem,  for  it  is  the  city  of  the  great  king.  Neither 
shalt  thou  swear  by  thy  head,  because  thou  canst  not  make  one 
hair  white  or  black.  But  let  your  communication  be  yea,  yea ; 
nay,  nay  ;  for  whatsoever  is  more  than  these  cometh  of  evil." 
And  to  the  same  effect  is  James  5:  12,  "  But  above  all  things,  my 
brethren,  swear  not,  neither  by  heaven,  neither  by  the  earth,  nei- 
ther by  any  other  oath ;  but  let  your  yea,  be  yea,  and  your  nay, 
nay,  lest  ye  fall  into  condemnation."  Now  in  these  passages,  all 
swearing  is  peremptorily  and  absolutely  forbidden,  as  all  resist- 
ance of  the  higher  powers  is  in  the  text.  Yet  we  all  understand 
the  former  with  some  limitation  ;  and  for  aught  that  appears  the 
same  limitation  may  as  reasonably  be  put  on  the  text,  as  upon 
these  passages.  As  in  these  passages  we  suppose  our  Lord  and 
the  apostles  only  meant  to  teach  us  that  in  general  we  ought  to 

21* 


242  SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS. 

be  cautious  of  swearing ;  that  we  ought  never  to  use  an  oath  on 
common  and  trivial  occasions  ;  and  especially  that  we  ought  never 
to  swear  profanely,  as  was  so  frequently  done  both  among  the 
Jews  and  the  heathen  ;  so,  with  the  same  reason,  we  may  sup- 
pose that  the  apostle,  in  our  text,  only  meant  to  teach  the  gene- 
ral duty  of  submission,  and  the  sin  of  resistance  in  ordinary  cases, 
without  at  all  intending  to  touch  the  question  whether  resistance 
may  not,  in  some  cases,  be  lawful. 

That  the  interpretation  thus  given  of  the  text  is  the  true  one, 
I  think  we  may  gather  from  the  immediate  context.  "  For  rulers 
are  not  a  terror  to  good  works,  but  to  the  evil.  Wilt  thou  then 
not  be  afraid  of  the  power  ?  Do  that  which  is  good,  and  thou 
shalt  have  praise  of  the  same.  For  he  is  a  minister  of  God  to 
thee  for  good,  but  a  revenger  to  execute  wrath  upon  him  that 
doeth  evil."  They  who  suppose  that  these  words  contain  an  ab- 
solute prohibition  of  all  resistance  of  the  supreme  power,  must,  at 
the  same  time,  hold  that  the  character  here  given  of  civil  rulers 
applies  to  all  rulers  without  exception  ;  for  no  reason  can  be  given 
why  the  word  "rulers"  in  the  third  verse  should  be  less  extensive 
than  the  words  "  higher  powers  "  in  the  first.  And  such  persons 
actually  do  hold,  that  what  is  said  in  the  first  and  second  verses, 
had  a  special  and  direct  reference  to  the  rulers  who  were  in  power 
when  the  apostle  wrote  ;  and  therefore  they  must  also  hold  that 
what  is  said  in  the  third  and  fourth  verses,  has  the  same  reference 
to  these  rulers.  But  this  is  impossible,  because  with  reference  to 
them  it  was  not  true.  It  was  by  no  means  the  true  character  of 
those  rulers,  that  they  were  a  terror  to  evil  works,  and  not  to 
good  ;  and  that  if  a  man  did  that  which  was  good,  he  should  cer- 
tainly have  praise  of  them,  or  that  they  were  the  ministers  of  God 
to  christians  for  good,  or  that  they  were  revengers  to  execute 
wrath  upon  the  evil.  Their  true  character,  in  general,  was  quite 
the  reverse  of  all  this.  Whereas  if  we  understand  the  words  in 
the  sense  that  has  now  been  given,  no  such  difficulty  occurs. 
The  apostle  lays  down  the  general  duty  of  submission  and  obe- 
dience; and  as  a  reason  of  it  states  the  end  of  the  institution  of 
civil  government  and  of  the  appointment  of  civil  rulers,  which  is, 
to  be  a  terror  to  evil  doers,  and  a  praise  and  a  recompense  to 
those  that  do  well. 

There  are  several  other  things  that  make  it  still  further  plain 
that  such  must  be  the  true  construction  of  this  passage.  It  seems 
very  evident  from  the  whole  New  Testament,  that  neither  Christ 
nor  his  apostles  intended  to  intermeddle  in  any  curious  questions 
or  disputes  upon  politics.  Our  Lord  with  indignation  rejected 
the  thought  of  being  a  judge  and  a  divider  over  the  people.     And 


SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS.  243 

agreeably  to  this,  he  ever  conducted  himself  in  his  teaching  and 
his  conversation,  both  in  public  and  private.  While  in  general 
terms  he  taught  mankind  their  duty,  he  ever  very  carefully  avoided 
any  nice  disquisitions  on  political  topics ;  and  even  when  the 
Jews,  with  all  their  craft  endeavored  to  draw  out  his  opinion  con- 
cerning the  paying  of  tribute,  he  utterly  evaded  the  question, 
merely  telling  them,  in  general,  to  "  render  unto  Caesar,  the  things 
that  are  Caesar's,  and  unto  God,  the  things  that  are  God's." 
He  might  easily  have  told  them  in  express  terms,  whether  they 
were  in  duty  bound  to  pay  tribute,  and  to  submit  to  such  a  ty- 
rannical prince  as  Caesar ;  and  so  the  apostle  might  easily  have 
told  us,  in  the  text,  whether  in  any  case,  it  is  lawful  to  resist  the 
higher  powers.  With  the  same  ease,  too,  he  might  have  told  us 
whether  it  be  lawful  ever  to  resist  any  private  person  who  shall 
assault  us,  or  rob  us  of  our  property  ;  or  whether  it  ever  be  law- 
ful to  protect  our  property  and  seek  satisfaction  for  injuries  in  a 
legal  way.  But  for  wise  reasons,  no  doubt,  Christ  and  his  spirit 
have  passed  over  these  matters  in  silence,  only  teaching  us  our 
general  duty,  and  leaving  particular  cases,  which  are  endless  in 
their  variety  of  circumstances,  to  be  determined  by  the  light  of 
of  these  general  rules,  and  of  natural  reason. 

That  the  apostle  did  not  mean  to  teach  that  it  is  never  lawful 
to  resist  the  higher  powers,  is  further  manifest  from  various  things 
mentioned  in  the  scriptures,  to  one  or  two  of  which  I  would 
briefly  advert.  Barely  alluding  to  the  army  that  David  raised  to 
resist  Saul  if  it  should  be  needful,  and  which  he  did,  so  far  as  we 
know,  with  God's  approbation,  I  pass  to  notice  more  particularly 
the  revolt  of  the  ten  tribes  from  Rehoboam.  The  people  of  Is- 
rael having  suffered  much  under  the  grievous  yoke  of  Solomon, 
determined  to  effect  a  reformation  in  the  government.  For  this 
purpose  they  made  proposals  to  Rehoboam.  And  when  he  re- 
jected them  with  disdain,  and  treating  them  with  contempt  even 
threatened  them  with  more  grievous  burdens  than  they  had  borne 
under  Solomon,  the  ten  tribes,  with  one  consent  revolted,  and 
set  up  another  king  Jeroboam.  Yet  they  are  never  once  blamed 
for  this  conduct.  On  the  contrary,  when  Rehoboam  was  about 
to  make  war  upon  them  to  recover  his  dominion,  God  utterly  for- 
bade him,  saying,  ''  This  thing  is  from  me."  Yet  I  know  not 
that  this  was  any  more  from  God  than  any  other  rebellion  against 
a  tyrannical  prince  whom  God  in  his  providence  may  permit  and 
prosper  ;  for  though  in  this  case  by  a  prophet  he  had  foretold  the 
event,  yet  he  had  given  the  ten  tribes  no  permission  in  this  way 
to  accomplish  the  prediction  ;  and  a  mere  prediction  never  justi- 
fies any  action  which  otherwise  would  have  been  criminal.     Now 


244  SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS. 

can  we  suppose  that  the  scriptures  are  so  inconsistent  with  them- 
selves as  to  teach  in  one  place  that  resistance  to  rulers  is  never 
lawful,  while  in  other  cases  they  contain  those  plain  facts  which 
so  evidently  of  themselves  justify  resistance  in  some  cases,  and 
that  without  an  intimation  that  it  was  not  pleasing  to  God  ? 

I  might  further  argue  the  same  thing  from  the  people's  resis- 
tance of  Saul  when  determined  to  destroy  Jonathan  ;  from  his 
servants'  refusing  to  obey  in  slaying  the  priests  of  the  Lord  ; 
from  the  case  of  the  Egyptian  midwives ;  from  David's  war  with 
Ishbosheth  ;  from  his  joining  the  Philistines  against  Saul ;  from 
the  conspiracies  against  Joash  and  Amaziah,  which  seem  to  be 
mentioned  with  approbation,  or  at  least  without  disapprobation  ; 
from  the  frequent  revolts  of  the  Israelites  from  under  the  domin- 
ion of  the  Philistines  and  other  nations,  by  whom  they  had  been 
as  really  conquered  as  by  the  Romans  in  the  times  of  our  Savior  ; 
and  also  from  the  brave  and  vigorous  resistance  of  the  Maccabees 
and  their  adherents,  to  Antiochus  Epiphanes  and  the  other  kings 
of  Syria,  which  is  spoken  of  approvingly  by  the  prophets. 

But  passing  by  these  things  in  the  Old  Testament,  I  would 
mention  one  or  two  things  in  the  New  which  are  worthy  of  our 
notice.  The  first  is  the  direction  of  our  Lord  to  his  disciples, 
when  they  were  persecuted  in  one  city  to  flee  to  another.  Now 
fleeing  from  under  the  government  of  a  prince  is  one  kind  of  re- 
sistance ;  for  if  the  generality  of  his  subjects  or  all  of  them  should 
flee,  this  would  as  effectually  break  up  his  government  and  de- 
throne him  as  a  universal  rebellion.  The  other  case  is  where 
the  apostle  Peter  says,  in  his  first  epistle,  "  submit  yourselves  to 
every  ordinance  of  man  for  the  Lord's  sake  ;  whether  it  be  to 
the  king,  as  supreme  ;  or  unto  governors,  as  unto  those  that  are 
sent  by  him."  It  ought  to  have  been  translated,  "  submit  your- 
selves to  every  "  creature  of  man  ;"  for  so  it  is  in  the  original — 
the  words  being  "  avOgomivri  xziaei. "  So  that  the  apostle  here 
declares  all  civil  rulers,  whether  supreme  or  subordinate  to  be 
"  creatures  of  men."  But  if  they  be  the  creatures  of  men,  sure- 
ly men  have  a  right  to  resist  or  even  to  unmake  and  annihilate 
them,  if  they  rule  not  according  to  the  will  of  God  and  the  good 
of  the  subject. 

Thus  I  have  endeavored  briefly  to  lay  before  you  the  scriptu- 
ral views  concerning  resistance  of  civil  rulers.  The  arguments 
from  reason  respecting  the  matter  I  have  not  even  hinted  at,  as 
this  was  beside  my  present  purpose. 

Upon  the  whole  I  think  we  may  justly  infer  that  the  doctrines 
of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance  are  not  the  doctrines  of 
the  Bible,  and  that  non-resistance  to  the  supreme  powers  is  no 


SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS.  245 

more  taught  in  the  scriptures,  than  non-resistance  to  our  fellow 
men,  and  even  to  thieves,  robbers,  and  those  who  use  the  most 
abusive  violence.  I  hope,  therefore,  that  our  text,  and  some 
other  passages  of  scripture,  all  of  which  are  to  be  taken  in  the 
same  sense,  will  no  more  be  quoted  to  prove  and  sustain  the  doc- 
trines of  passive  obedience  and  non-resistance,  especially  in  times 
like  these.  The  truth  is,  and  the  whole  spirit  of  scripture  sus- 
tains it,  that  rulers  are  bound  to  rule  in  the  fear  of  God  and  for 
the  good  of  the  people  ;  and  if  they  do  not,  then  in  resisting 
them  we  are  doing  God  service. 

Having  now  finished  what  it  was  proposed  to  say  directly  upon 
this  subject,  I  shall  be  expected  to  say  something  to  the  freemen 
present,  with  respect  to  the  immediate  business  of  the  day.  And 
since  it  has  become  customary  upon  this  occasion  to  point  out  to 
the  freemen  what  should  be  the  character  of  the  men  for  whom 
they  shall  vote,  and  whom  they  shall  now  choose  for  rujers,  I  am 
willing  to  comply  with  the  custom,  and  also  to  show  mine  opinion. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  then,  as  you  ought  always  on  this  anni- 
versary to  make  choice  of  those  only  to  rule  over  you,  who  are 
real  friends  to  your  country  and  its  constitution,  so  you  ought  to 
be  especially  careful  in  this  day  when  the  rights,  the  liberty,  and 
the  peace  of  our  country  are  so  immediately  threatened.  One 
man  who  is  not  a  friend  to  the  rights  and  liberty  of  his  country, 
now  chosen  to  any  office  in  the  civil  government,  may  do  more 
harm  than  ten  good  men  in  the  same  office  can  do  good.  Now 
in  the  light  of  enemies  to  our  country  I  think  we  may  fairly  con- 
sider those  who  themselves  reject  the  result  of  the  late  Conti- 
nental Congress,  and  the  similar  votes  and  proceedings  of  our 
own  House  of  Representatives,  and  who  not  only  do  this,  but  also 
endeavor  to  stir  up  a  party  to  oppose  them.  Agreeably  to  this 
general  rule,  you  ought  by  no  means  to  choose  a  man  who  says 
that  the  plan  adopted  by  the  Congress  is  altogether  wrong,  and 
that  if  we  ever  obtain  relief,  it  must  be  in  a  way  entirely  diiferent, 
viz.  by  barely  petitioning  the  king  and  parliament.  Brethren, 
you  have  reason  to  resent  such  speeches  as  these,  not  only  as 
they  tend  to  divide  the  country  in  this  critical  juncture,  and 
thereby  make  us  an  easy  prey  to  our  enemies,  but  also  as  they  are 
utterly  contradictory  to  your  own  sentiments  expressed  in  your 
public  votes.  You  have  almost  unanimously  voted  your  appro- 
bation of  the  result  of  the  late  Congress,  a  result  which  we  doubt 
not  time  will  show  was  most  wisely  ordered  and  brought  about  by 
Divine  Providence  for  his  own  glory  and  the  freedom  and  pros- 
perity of  this  people.     For  you  therefore  to  promote  men  to  civil 


346  SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS. 

rule,  who  publicly  declare  their  disapprobation  of  that  result,  is  to 
act  a  part  very  inconsistent  and  very  unwise. 

2.  For  the  same  reason  you  ought  by  no  means  to  vote  for  a 
man  who  declares  "  that  he  considers  the  citizens  of  Boston  not 
as  suffering  in  the  common  cause  of  American  liberty,  but  as 
suffering  the  fruits  of  their  own  folly  and  rashness."  Such 
speeches  have  been  made,  and  by  some  who  would  like  to  be 
chosen  to  office.  But  you  ought  to  mark  such  men,  and  show 
your  disapprobation  of  their  sentiments  and  your  love  for  your 
country,  by  refusing  to  give  them  your  votes.  Our  Congress 
have  abundantly  declared  that  they  consider  Boston  as  suffering 
in  the  common  cause  of  American  rights  and  liberty  ;  and  so  it 
most  manifestly  is.  He  therefore,  that  declares  the  contrary,  does 
not  agree  with  the  Congress,  nor  with  the  manifest  interests  of  the 
country  ;  nor  can  you  vote  for  such  a  man  without  declaring  your 
disagreement  with  that  same  Congress,  whose  result  you  have 
publicly  and  solemnly  adopted  as  your  own,  and  your  disregard 
for  the  best  interests  of  your  country. 

3.  Nor  ought  you  to  vote  for  those  who  speak  contemptuously 
of  the  late  law  of  our  Assembly  so  necessary  to  put  us  in  a  pos- 
ture of  self-defence ;  who  either  say,  that  it  was  foolish  to  make 
any  such  law,  and  that  it  is  the  most  easy  thing  in  the  world  for 
Great  Britain  to  subdue  this  country  ;  or  who  say,  that  they  never 
were  for  these  armings  and  trainings  of  the  soldiers ;  that  all  the 
burden  comes  upon  the  farmers  ;  that  they  must  pay  the  expenses 
of  the  soldiers'  training,  and  also  must  train  themselves  ;  and  that 
they  must  go  to  Boston,  and  expose  their  lives  in  battle,  for  that 
gentlemen,  and  particularly  the  gentlemen  of  the  Assembly  never 
expected  to  go  there  or  anywhere  else  to  fight.  Of  such  persons 
I  might  observe,  that  he  that  is  not  willing,  if  need  be,  to  defend 
his  liberty,  deserves  to  be  a  slave.  But  without  dwelling  on  this, 
I  would  especially  say,  that  the  manifest  tendency  of  all  such 
speeches  is  to  disaffect  the  minds  of  the  people  towards  our  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  and  to  raise  in  them  a  spirit  of  jealousy  towards 
those  whom  these  men  call  gentlemen  ;  and  such  a  sower  of  dis- 
cord among  the  people,  especially  in  such  a  day  as  this,  when  so 
much  depends  upon  our  unanimity,  ought  to  be  frowned  upon 
with  indignation  by  every  friend  to  the  people  and  the  country. 

4.  Once  more,  let  me  caution  you  against  giving  your  votes 
for  a  man  who  being  a  farmer  himself,  and  a  known  candidate  for 
office,  goes  round  among  the  farmers  and  tells  them  that  it  is  by 
all  means  best  for  them  to  send  a  farmer  to  the  Assembly,  and  not 
one  that  lives  in  the  town  or  city.  Such  bare-faced  impudence 
is  intolerable  !     I  am  astonished  at  it !     And  he  must  be  short- 


SUBMISSION  TO  RULERS.  247 

sighted  indeed,  who  cannot  see  through  it.  As  well  might  such 
a  one  say,  "  gentlemen,  I  would  have  you  vote  for  me.  I  am 
the  fittest  one  in  town  to  be  sent  as  your  representative.  Let  me 
have  your  votes."  Again  I  say,  I  am  astonished  at  such  impu- 
dence ;  and  those  who  are  guilty  of  it  ought  to  be  ashamed  of  it ! 
This,  I  know,  is  plain  speaking ;  but  the  occasion  calls  for  it. 
And  if  any  should  think  I  have  spoken  too  plainly,  I  would  only 
say,  that  it  is  the  business  of  ministers  to  tell  men  their  sins  ;  and 
he  is  unworthy  of  his  office  who  has  not  the  firmness  to  do  it. 

5.  Finally  ;  I  would  observe  that  we  of  this  town,  by  some 
means  or  other,  are  become  the  objects  of  suspicion  to  many  of 
our  neighbors  of  the  other  towns  about  us.  They  suspect  that  we 
are  not  sincere  and  hearty  friends  to  the  cause  of  American  lib- 
erty. This  day  we  have  a  fair  opportunity  to  remove  this  sus- 
picion, by  unanimously  choosing  men  to  represent  us  in  the  next 
legislature,  who  are  known,  and  who  on  all  occasions  have  ap- 
peared themselves  to  be,  not  only  men  of  integrity  and  ability, 
but  also  hearty  friends  of  the  rights  and  liberties  of  their  country, 
and  steady  opposers  of  every  encroachment  on  these  rights.  But 
if  we  shall  this  day  make  choice  of  men,  who  are  known  either 
now  to  be,  or  to  have  been,  in  time  past,  opposed  to  the  rights 
and  liberty  of  their  country,  and  advocates  for  the  rights  of  the 
British  parliament  to  tax  us ;  or  if  we  even  choose  men  whose 
characters  in  this  respect  are  doubtful,  we  shall,  in  either  of  these 
cases,  confirm  the  suspicions  of  our  neighbors,  and  fix  upon  our- 
selves the  character  which  many  have  already,  without  sufficient 
reason,  attributed  to  us,  of  being  friends  to  parliamentary  taxation, 
and  enemies  to  our  country.  Let  us  bear  in  mind  what  may  be 
our  influence,  and  what  are  our  high  responsibilities,  and  so  act 
as  to  endeavor  to  meet  them,  whether  in  relation  to  God,  our 
country,  or  our  fellow  men. 


SERMON  XV. 


MERE  REPENTANCE  NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.* 

Acts  3:  19.  —  Repent  therefore,  and  be  converted,  tliat  your  sins  may  he 

blotted  out. 

Whether  God  will  pardon  our  sins,  is  a  most  important  ques- 
tion. And  if  he  will  pardon  at  all,  the  next  question  is,  in  what 
way  and  on  what  conditions  will  he  do  it?  The  scriptures  as- 
sure us  that  on  our  repentance  and  faith  he  will  pardon  us  for 
Christ's  sake.  But  what  is  the  doctrine  of  reason,  or  of  the  light 
of  nature  ?  If  we  may  believe  infidels,  it  is  that  we  shall  be  par- 
doned on  our  bare  repentance,  without  a  mediator  and  without 
any  atonement.  This  is  a  main  principle  of  infidelity,  on  which 
the  whole  system,  so  far  as  it  is  allowed  that  we  are  sinners,  de- 
pends. Therefore  let  us  consider  it  attentively,  and  inquire  whe- 
ther it  be  indeed  the  voice  of  reason  that  we  shall  be  pardoned  on 
our  repentance  barely. 

Several  eminent  infidels,  as  Hume  and  Bolingbroke,  deny  that 
there  is  any  evidence  of  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  or  that  he 
is  a  good  being.  On  this  principle  there  cannot  possibly  be  evi- 
dence that  he  will  pardon  at  all,  either  in  consequence  of  repent- 
ance, or  without  it.  For  unless  we  have  evidence  of  his  good- 
ness, it  is  impossible  that  we  should  know  but  that  he  will  take 
pleasure  in  torturing  his  creatures,  whether  it  answer  any  good 
purpose  or  not,  or  whether  they  deserve  it  or  not.  When  infi- 
dels say  that  God  will  pardon  on  bare  repentance,  they  must  be- 
lieve either  ihdl  justice  requires  such  pardon,  or  that  mere  good- 
ness and  grace  require  it ;  either  that  pardon  is  no  more  than 
strict  justice  requires,  or  that  though  it  is  indeed  beyond  the  re- 
quirement of  strict  justice,  it  is  required  by  divine  goodness  and 
grace.     Let  us  consider  the  proposition  on  both  these  grounds. 

I.  That  the  pardon  of  the  penitent  is  a  mere  act  of  justice, 
and  that  if  he  he  not  pardoned,  he  suffers  injustice.  Concern- 
ing this  I  observe, 

1.  If  this  be  the  case,  it  is  no  pardon  at  all,  and  it  is  absurd 

*  No  date. 


REPENTANCE  NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.  249 

to  call  it  by  that  name.  To  release  a  man  on  the  footing  of  jus- 
tice, is  manifestly  no  pardon,  but  a  mere  act  of  justice  which  he 
deserves,  and  which  cannot  be  denied  him  without  injury  and 
oppression.  But  pardon,  in  its  very  nature,  is  an  act  of  grace, 
which  may  be  denied  without  injustice.  On  this  hypothesis,  then, 
the  law  of  nature  must  be,  that  we  shall  perform  certain  actions ; 
and  that  if  we  do  not,  we  shall  repent,  and  thenceforth  perform 
them.  Now  if  this  be  the  law  of  nature,  then  it  is  plain,  that  if 
we  either  perform  the  actions  required,  or  having  neglected  them 
if  we  afterward  repent  and  thenceforward  perform  them,  we  ful- 
fil the  law  of  nature,  and  stand  right  with  respect  to  it,  and  there- 
fore are  to  be  justified  by  it.  Our  conduct,  in  either  case,  equal- 
ly answers  the  law.  Where  then  is  the  foundation  or  possibility 
of  pardon  in  consequence  of  repentance  ?  There  is  no  possibil- 
ity of  it,  as  there  is  nothing  to  be  pardoned. 

2.  On  this  supposition,  repentance  is  either  the  complete  and 
perfect  obedience  of  the  law,  or  it  is  its  complete  penalty.  Oth- 
erwise it  does  not,  and  cannot  answer  the  law  or  satisfy  it,  so  but 
that  the  sinner  is  still,  both  by  law  and  justice,  liable  to  its  penal- 
ty. Surely  he  is  liable  to  the  penalty  of  the  law,  who  has  indeed 
broken  it,  and  who  has  not  suffered  the  penalty.  For  as  to  a 
gracious  pardon,  whether  with  or  without  an  atonement,  it  is  in 
the  present  case,  entirely  out  of  the  question  ;  because  the  very 
principle  on  which  we  proceed,  at  present  is,  that  the  penitent  is 
to  be  released  from  punishment  on  the  footing  of  justice  and  not 
of  grace.  But  repentance  is  neither  the  perfect  obedience  of  the 
law,  nor  the  complete  penalty.  It  is  not  the  perfect  obedience 
of  the  law,  as  it  is  supposed  that  the  subject  has  transgressed  the 
law  ;  and  indeed,  otherwise  there  would  be  no  foundation  or  pos- 
sibility of  repentance.  Nor  is  repentance  the  complete  penalty 
of  the  law.  That  is  a  curse  ;  but  repentance  is  a  blessing.  The 
penalty  of  any  law  is  an  evil;  but  repentance  is  a  good,  and  a 
most  important  and  invaluable  good.  And  to  imagine  that  this 
is  the  curse  or  penalty  of  the  law,  is  to  confound  good  and  evil, 
curses  and  blessings.  If  a  man  in  consequence  of  transgressing 
the  law  of  nature,  be  justly  liable  to  repentance  only,  he  is  rather 
entitled  to  a  reward  than  exposed  to  penalty,  and  so  transgres- 
sion will  appear  to  be  a  moral  good,  rather  than  a  moral  evil. 

3.  This  supposition  implies  that  the  end  of  all  punishment  is 
the  good  of  the  transgressor,  and  that  he,  in  any  case,  deserves 
no  more  punishment  than  is  subservient  to  his  repentance  and  re- 
formation. But  this  is  by  no  means  true  in  human  governments  ; 
and  whence  does  it  become  true  in  the  divine  ?  We  never  exe- 
cute a  murderer  for  his  good,  or  to  lead  him  to  repentance  and 

Vol.  II.  22 


250  MERE  REPENTANCE 

to  reform  his  morals.  He  is  executed  to  restrain  and  deter  others, 
to  support  the  authority  of  the  law,  and  to  establish  government. 
Yet  the  case  may  be  so  clear  that  no  man  shall  question  the  jus- 
tice of  the  execution.  A  child  may  deserve  to  be  disinherited, 
and  to  be  banished  from  his  father's  house,  though  there  be  no 
prospect,  and  therefore  no  intention  of  reforming  him  by  the  mea- 
sure. The  sole  end  may  be,  to  deter  the  other  children  from  the 
like  vicious  courses,  and  to  cut  off  the  abandoned  child  from  the 
opportunity  to  corrupt  them.  In  like  manner,  if  a  man  have 
transgressed  the  law  of  God,  and  thereby  have  trampled  on  that 
law,  and  done  what  in  him  lies  to  bring  it  into  general  neglect 
and  contempt,  it  is  just  that  he  should  be  exemplarily  punished, 
to  restrain  and  deter  others.  The  public  good  requires  it.  It  is 
due  to  the  public,  and  therefore  is  just.  But  if  his  punishment 
be  just,  it  cannot  at  the  same  time  be  unjust ;  as  it  would  be,  if 
agreeably  to  the  principle  now  under  consideration,  he  be  entitled 
to  impunity  on  the  footing  of  justice. 

4.  This  principle  implies  that  there  is  in  transgression  no  evil 
in  any  other  respect  than  as  by  it  the  transgressor  has  injured 
hiinself.  The  principle  is  that  the  penitent  cannot  be  punished 
consistently  with  justice,  and  that  the  only  just  end  of  punish- 
ment is  the  repentance  and  good  of  the  transgressor.  But  if  the 
only  just  end  of  punishment  be  the  good  of  the  transgressor,  then 
the  only  just  end  of  punishment  is  to  remove  or  prevent  evil  to 
the  transgressor.  Therefore  the  whole  and  only  evil  of  trans- 
gression, or  that  on  the  account  of  which  it  deserves  punishment, 
is  some  ill  consequence  to  the  transgressor  personally,  and  there 
is  no  evil  in  it  in  any  other  respect.  Therefore  there  is  no  mora! 
evil  in  any  dishonor  done  to  God,  or  in  any  abuse  of  any  crea- 
ture, unless  therein  the  agent  do  an  injury  to  himself;  and  no 
further,  and  on  no  other  account  than  as  he  does  an  injury  to 
himself.  But  who  does  not  see  the  falsity  of  this  doctrine  ?  Who 
does  not  see  that  murder  and  theft  are  moral  evils,  whether  by 
them  the  murderer  and  the  thief  injure  or  benefit  them.selves  ? 
Who  does  not  see  that  another  man's  life  and  happiness,  other 
things  being  equal,  are  at  least  of  the  same  importance  and  worth 
as  the  life  and  happiness  of  a  murderer,  and  that  if  it  be  a  crime 
for  a  man  to  destroy  his  own  happiness  and  life,  it  is  also  a  crime 
to  destroy  those  of  another  person  ? 

5.  On  this  principle,  the  punishment  deserved  for  transgress- 
ing the  law  of  nature  is  no  evil  at  all,  but  a  very  valuable  good. 
It  is  either  repentance  itself,  or  that  wholesome  discipline  which 
is  necessary  to  lead  the  subject  to  repentance.  But  neither  of 
these  is  any  evil,  but  a  good,  an  advantage,  a  privilege.     So  that 


NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.  251 

on  this  principle,  sin  deserves  no  evil,  but  good ;  not  a  punish- 
ment, but  a  reward  ;  for  surely  even  that  w^holesonie  discipline 
which  is  absolutely  necessary  to  a  man's  repentance  and  highest 
happiness,  is  as  real  a  good,  and  may  be  as  properly  given  in  the 
way  of  reward,  as  an  effectual  medicine  to  a  sick  man.  Such  a 
medicine  is  no  token  of  the  displeasure  of  the  physician  towards 
his  patient,  but  of  his  benevolence.  So  the  necessary  and  whole- 
some discipline  in  question  is  no  token  of  the  displeasure  of  the 
Deity,  but  of  his  benevolence  to  the  individual.  It  would  be  as 
absurd  to  punish  vice  with  this,  as  it  would  be  to  punish  murder 
by  the  administration  of  some  dose,  of  disagreeable  taste  indeed, 
but  which  should  certainly  make  the  man  who  takes  it,  immortal 
and  entirely  prosperous  and  happy  forever. 

6.  h  cannot  be  the  law  of  nature  that  sin  deserves  to  be  pun- 
ished with  repentance  only,  or  with  only  that  discipline  which  is 
necessary  to  the  repentance  and  happiness  of  the  subject.  The 
law  of  nature  is  the  law  of  reason,  and  the  law  of  God.  It  is  the 
effect  of  infinite  reason  and  wisdom  ;  and  whatever  is  dictated 
by  the  law  of  nature,  is  the  dictate  of  infinite  reason  and  wisdom. 
Now  it  is  not  the  dictate  of  reason  that  sin  deserves  nothing  but 
repentance,  or  beneficial  discipline ;  but  it  is  the  dictate  of  rea- 
son that  it  deserves  some  real  and  proper  token  of  displeasure — 
something  that  on  the  whole  shall  be  a  real  evil  and  disadvantage 
to  the  sinner. 

7.  There  can  be  no  law  without  a  sanction,  a  punishment 
threatened.  But  neither  repentance,  nor  wholesome  discipline  is 
a  proper  punishment,  as  it  is  on  the  whole  no  evil  to  the  subject. 
Therefore  on  the  principle  we  are  now  considering,  there  is  no 
law  of  nature,  and  of  course  there  is,  without  revelation,  no 
moral  government  of  God  over  intelligent  creatures  ;  which  is 
contrary  to  the  avowed  doctrine  of  many  deists,  and  to  all  which 
they  say  concerning  the  law  of  nature. 

8.  If  the  law  of  nature  require,  on  the  footing  of  justice,  that 
every  penitent  be  pardoned,  then  it  is  a  dispensation  of  grace, 
and  it  ought  to  be  called  the  gospel  of  nature  instead  of  the  law 
of  nature.  But  what  evidence  have  we  that  there  is  such  a 
gospel  of  nature,  and  that  God  has  given  up,  or  will  give  up  the 
law  of  nature  to  make  way  for  this  gospel  ?  Besides,  there  is  a 
direct  contradiction  in  the  supposition  that  a  man  is  entitled  to 
pardon,  which  is  an  act  of  grace,  on  the  footing  of  strict  justice. 

9.  On  this  hypothesis,  sin,  or  transgression  of  the  moral  law  of 
nature  is  no  moral  evil.  Moral  evil  deserves  natural  evil — that 
natural  evil  which  is  an  evil  on  the  whole,  and  which  is  a  token 
of  the  divine  displeasure.     But  if  transgression  of  the  law  of  na- 


252  MERE  REPENTANCE 

ture  deserve  nothing  but  repentance,  it  deserves  nothing  which, 
on  the  whole,  is  any  evil  to  the  subject,  and  therefore  is  not  a 
moral  evil.  Moral  evil  deserves  to  be  disapproved  and  abhorred. 
This  abhorrence  is  just ;  and  therefore  it  is  just  in  God,  the  su- 
preme magistrate  of  the  universe,  to  show  this  abhorrence  in  a 
corresponding  treatment  of  the  subject,  and  that,  whether  such 
manifestation  tend  to  the  repentance  and  good  of  the  subject  or 
not.  And  if  this  be  just,  it  is  deserved,  and  moral  evil  deserves 
something  more  than  repentance.  J3ut  sin  or  transgression,  by 
the  present  supposition,  deserves  nothing  more  than  repentance. 
Therefore,  according  to  this  supposition,  it  is  not  a  moral  evil. 

If  sin  deserve  hatred,  and  the  proper  fruits  of  hatred  in  no 
case  but  when  such  hatred  and  fruits  are  beneficial  to  the  sinner, 
then  sin  is  not  in  itself,  and  on  account  of  its  own  nature  and 
tendency  hateful,  but  on  account  of  this  circumstance,  that  the 
hatred  of  it,  and  the  proper  fruits  of  that  hatred  are  beneficial  to 
the  sinner,  and  in  this  circumstance  alone  the  evil  of  sin  consists, 
which  is  absurd.  And  if  it  be  evil  in  no  other  respect,  if  it  be 
not  hateful  on  account  of  its  own  nature  and  tendency,  it  is  no 
moral  evil  at  all. 

Moral  evil  is  a  damage  to  the  intellectual  system,  as  it  violates 
the  law,  and  weakens  the  government  of  the  system  ;  and  unless 
restrained  and  counteracted,  it  would  issue  in  the  ruin  of  the 
system.  Therefore  the  good  of  the  system  requires  that  it  be  re- 
strained and  counteracted  by  the  great  moral  governor,  to  whom 
it  belongs  to  defend  the  rights  and  secure  the  interests  of  the 
system.  But  what  restraint  of  a  moral  kind,  and  in  the  way  of 
moral  government,  can  be  laid  upon  moral  evil,  otherwise  than 
by  law,  threatening,  and  punishment?  And  if  the  good  of  the 
intellectual  system  require  such  restraint  to  be  laid  on  sin,  then 
the  punishment  of  the  sinner,  which  must  be  more  than  repen- 
tance, is  just  and  sin  is  a  moral  evil. 

Moral  evil  is  a  damage  to  the  universe,  as  it  is  a  violation  of 
the  law,  an  opposition  to  the  authority  and  government  of  the 
God  of  nature,  and  as  it  dissolves  and  weakens  that  government. 
Therefore  satisfaction  is  due  to  that  authority  and  government, 
and  the  good  of  the  system  requires  that  by  something  done  to 
support  the  government,  to  restore  its  tone,  and  to  deter  others 
from  future  transgressions,  reparation  be  made  of  the  injury  done 
by  moral  evil.  But  bare  repentance  is  no  satisfaction  to  the  in- 
sulted and  weakened  law,  authority,  and  government  of  the  uni- 
verse— is  no  reparation  of  the  damage  done  to  the  public,  which 
consists  in  weakening  the  government ;  and  the  threatening  of 
repentance  is  no  proper  terror  or  restraint  to  others.     What  ter- 


NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.  253 

ror  will  it  be  to  the  man  disposed  to  commit  theft,  adultery,  mur- 
der or  treason,  to  assure  him  that  if  he  do  so,  he  shall  become 
the  subject  of  repentance,  which  is  on  the  whole  no  evil,  but  an 
inestimable  good,  absolutely  necessary  to  his  complete  and  ever- 
lasting hajipiness,  and  infallibly  connected  with  it  ?  It  would  be 
no  more  terrible,  and  no  more  have  a  tendency  to  restrain  the  in- 
dividual from  the  crimes  to  wjiicli  he  might  be  disposed,  and  would 
no  more  support  government,  or  give  satisfaction  for  a  crime  al- 
ready committed,  tlian  the  declaration  that  whoever  shall  commit 
either  of  the  crimes  just  mentioned,  shall  go  through  a  laborious 
and  painful  exertion,  to  be  followed  with  health,  honor,  and  com- 
plete happiness.  No  more  would  the  threatening  of  repentance 
be  a  proper  terror  and  restraint  to  those  who  are  disposed  to  put 
off  repentance  and  reconciliation  with  God  in  the  way  of  the 
gospel.  If  a  man,  pretending  to  deliver  an  authoritative  threat- 
ening, should  tell  a  procrastinating  sinner  that  if  he  do  not  now 
repent,  he  will  repent  hereafter ;  that  if  he  do  not  now  become 
reconciled  to  God,  he  will  hereafter  become  reconciled,  and 
thenceforth  forever  be  happy  in  him,  and  that  thus  he  shall  be 
purified  for  his  present  procrastination,  he  would  act  an  absurd 
and  contemptible,  not  to  say  a  ridiculous  part.  Now  whatever 
sin  deserves,  the  general  good  of  the  moral  system  requires,  and 
no  more.  Therefore  if  sin  deserve  no  more  by  way  of  punish- 
ment than  repentance,  which  is  no  satisfaction  for  the  crime  of 
moral  evil,  no  support  of  the  divine  government,  no  proper  terror 
or  restraint  of  others  from  future  transgressions,  and  therefore  no 
reparation  of  damage  done  to  the  system,  then  the  good  of  the 
moral  system  requires  so  such  reparation.  And  if  it  require  no 
such  reparation,  it  must  be  for  the  reason  that  it  hath  not  been 
impaired  ;  and  if  it  have  not  been  impaired,  no  moral  evil  has 
been  committed.     Therefore  sin  is  no  moral  evil. 

If  it  be  not  just  to  inflict  on  the  sinner  any  punishment  besides 
repentance,  or  to  exact  anything  else  of  him,  then  he  owes  no- 
thing else,  whether  to  the  universe  or  to  the  supreme  magistracy 
of  it.  Of  course  the  public  good  requires  nothing  else  of  him, 
by  way  of  reparation  of  damage,  support  of  government,  or  of 
restoring  the  tone  of  government.  And  if  the  public  good  re- 
quire nothing  of  this  kind,  then  no  damage  has  been  done,  the 
government  has  not  been  weakened,  and  the  tone  of  it  has  not 
been  relaxed.     Of  course  sin  is  no  moral  evil. 

If  it  be  not  just  to  punish  the  penitent,  then  he  deserves  it  not ; 
and  he  does  not  owe  it  to  the  public,  or  the  public  good  does  not 
require  his  punishment ;  it  only  requires  that  he  should  repent. 
Therefore  either  all  his  past  transgressions  of  the  law  of  nature 

22* 


254  MERE  REPENTANCE 

are  no  damage  to  the  public,  or  his  repentance  makes  full  satis- 
faction for  them.  But  repentance  does  not  make  full  satisfac- 
tion, as  is  plain  in  cases  of  murder,  treason,  etc.  Of  course,  on 
the  present  supposition,  his  past  transgressions  are  no  damage  to 
the  public,  or  in  other  words  are  no  moral  evil.  And  if  they  be 
no  moral  evil,  neither  will  any  future  transgressions  be  so.  A 
repetition  of  nothing  is  still  nothing. 

If  the  man  who  repents  do  not  deserve  punishment,  he  no 
more  deserved  it  before  he  repented,  unless  it  be  that  his  re- 
pentance make  full  satisfaction  for  his  sin,  and  by  restoring  the 
tone  of  the  divine  law  and  government,  and  exhibiting  a  proper 
motive  to  deter  others  from  transgression  and  repair  the  damage 
done  to  the  system.  But  this  is  not  the  fact,  as  appears  by  the 
reasons  already  given.  And  if  the  sinner  never  deserve  punish- 
ment, whether  before  or  after  repentance,  he  has  committed  no 
evil. 

Perhaps  it  may  be  objected  to  some  of  the  foregoing  reasoning 
that  God's  government  needs  no  support,  as  it  is  impossible  to 
overthrow,  or  even  to  weaken  it,  and  that  the  pubhc  good  of 
God's  kingdom  cannot  possibly  be  impaired.  If  this  objection 
mean  that  God's  government  is  irresistible,  and  uncontrollable, 
this  is  undoubtedly  true.  But  this  is  not  all  that  is  requisite  in 
the  divine  government.  A  human  government  in  the  hands  of 
an  absolute  tyrant  may  be  irresistible  ;  and  yet  it  may  be  unstable, 
capricious,  relaxed  and  contemptible.  Its  laws  may  not  be  exe- 
cuted, and  disobedience  may  at  least  in  many  instances  be  prac- 
tised without  restraint.  Nor  will  mere  power,  however  irresisti- 
ble, be  sufficient  to  prevent  these  effects.  Nor  can  this  govern- 
ment be  maintained  with  honor  and  dignity  but  by  a  steady  exe- 
cution of  the  laws,  or  proper  satisfaction  for  crimes.  And  just  so 
as  to  the  divine  government.  As  to  the  part  of  the  objection 
which  asserts  that  the  good  of  God's  kingdom  cannot  be  im- 
paired, it  may  be  observed,  that  it  is  not  true  in  any  other  sense, 
than  that  the  laws  of  this  kingdom  cannot  fail  to  be  steadily  exe- 
cuted, or  supported  with  dignity.  As  the  wisdom,  holiness,  and 
goodness  of  God  make  it  certain  that  he  will  steadily  execute  or 
support  his  own  good  and  perfect  law,  so  it  is  certain  that  the 
good  of  his  kingdom  cannot  be  impaired.  Otherwise  we  could 
not  be  certain  that  it  might  not  be.     But, 

II.  Let  us  consider  the  other  supposition,  that  the  penitent 
does  not  indeed  on  the  footing  of  justice  deserve  impunity,  yet 
that  by  free  grace  he  may  obtain  it,  and  that  the  divine  per- 
Jections  require  that  he  should. 

If  the  exemption  of  the  penitent  from  punishment  be  an  act  of 


NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.  255 

jTree  grace,  still  divine  goodness  will  not  admit  of  it  unless  it  be 
required  by  the  general  good  of  the  moral  system.  Now  real  and 
extensive  goodness,  sucii  as  the  goodness  of  God,  is  always  gov- 
erned by  the  general  good,  and  seeks  what  is  required  by  that 
and  that  only.  It  would  be  no  goodness,  but  the  very  opposite 
of  goodness,  to  seek  an  object  which  however  it  might  promote 
the  iiappincss  of  the  individual,  or  of  the  few,  does  on  the  whole, 
and  with  respect  to  the  entire  system,  obstruct  or  diminish  good 
and  happiness.  So  that  the  divine  goodness  does  not  require  the 
pardon  of  the  sinner  on  his  repentance  merely,  unless  the  general 
good  of  the  moral  system  require  it.  Now  if  the  general  good 
require  it,  it  either  requires  it  even  without  repentance,  or  it  re- 
quires it  as  a  consequence  of  repentance  only.  If  it  require  par- 
don in  the  former  case,  then  the  general  good  requires  no  satis- 
faction, or  reparation  of  damage — nothing  to  restrain  or  deter 
others  from  the  like  transgression  ;  if  this  be  the  fact,  it  must  be 
because  no  damage  to  the  public  good  has  been  done  by  sin,  and 
therefore  sin  is  no  moral  evil. 

If  on  the  other  hand  it  be  said  that  the  general  good  requires 
that  pardon  be  dispensed  in  consequence  of  repentance  only,  still 
as  repentance  is  no  proper  punishment  of  sin,  no  satisfaction  for 
it,  nothing  adequate  to  the  ends  of  deterring  and  restraining  others 
from  its  commission,  or  of  supporting  the  authority  of  the  divine 
law,  and  the  tone  of  the  divine  government,  and  therefore  does 
not  repair  the  damage  done  to  the  moral  system  by  moral  evil,  it 
of  course  follows,  that  there  was  no  damage  done  by  sin  to  the 
system,  and  therefore  that  sin  is  no  moral  evil. 

If  the  law  of  nature  which  is  founded  on  the  public  good,  and 
always  requires  what  that  requires,  do  not  require  the  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner,  or  anything  to  repair  the  violation  of  the  law 
of  nature,  it  must  be  because  it  has  not  been  violated,  that  is  has 
not  been  transgressed,  which  is  contrary  to  the  supposition  ;  for 
what  is  sin  but  the  transgression  of  the  divine  law,  which,  where 
there  is  no  revelation,  is  the  law  of  nature  ? 

If  the  penitent  deserve  punishment,  as  is  now  supposed,  then 
tlie  law  of  nature  requires  it.  As  he  is  supposed  to  be  without 
revelation,  and  to  sin  against  no  law  beside  the  law  of  nature,  of 
course  he  deserves  nothing  but  what  the  law  of  nature  requires. 
But  it  is  granted  that  he  deserves  punishment.  Therefore  the 
law  of  nature  requires  it,  and  of  course  cannot  require  that  he  be 
dismissed  with  impunity.  Doubtless  the  law  of  nature  may  be 
executed,  in  some  instances  at  least,  consistently  with  the  general 
good.  It  would  be  absurd  to  suppose  the  contrary.  The  law  of 
nature  is  founded  on  the  general  good.     Whatever  the  general 


S56  MERE    REPENTANCE 

good  requires,  reason  requires  in  every  instance ;  and  whatever 
reason  requires,  the  law  of  nature  requires.  Therefore  if  the  law 
of  nature  require  the  punishment  of  the  penitent,  as  it  certainly 
does  if  by  that  law  he  deserves  punishment,  the  general  good, 
and  the  divine  goodness  require  the  same. 

It  is,  in  the  present  state  of  the  argument  granted,  that  by  jus- 
tice and  the  law  of  nature  the  transgressor,  even  though  penitent, 
deserves  punishment.  But  the  law  of  nature  is  the  law  of  reason  ; 
and  the  law  of  reason  is  the  law  of  the  general  good  of  the  moral 
system — the  law  which  is  entirely  regulated  by  the  general  good, 
and  which  requires  what  that  requires,  and  forbids  and  threatens 
only  what  that  forbids  and  threatens.  Therefore  if  the  law  of 
justice  and  of  nature  threaten  and  require  the  punishment  of  the 
transgressor,  even  though  he  repent,  as  it  is  now  granted  that  it 
does,  the  general  good  of  the  moral  system  requires  the  same. 
Therefore  it  cannot  require  at  the  same  time  his  pardon.  And 
if  the  general  good  do  not  require  this,  neither  does  the  goodness 
of  God  require  it.  If  the  sinner  though  penitent  deserve  pun- 
ishment he  deserves  it  by  the  law  of  nature.  But  the  law  of  na- 
ture is  the  law  of  right,  and  is  the  rule  of  right.  That  he  should 
be  punished  therefore  is  right,  all  things  considered.  But  the 
divine  goodness  never  forbids,  but  absolutely  requires  what  is 
right  all  things  considered.  Therefore  the  divine  goodness  re- 
quires his  punishment. 

To  allow  that  it  would  be  consistent  with  justice  to  punish  the 
penitent,  and  yet  to  say  that  divine  goodness  does  not  admit  of 
his  punishment,  is  to  hold  a  direct  contradiction.  If  his  punish- 
ment be  just  and  deserved,  the  general  good  allows  and  requires 
it,  as  the  general  good  is  the  measure  of  justice  when  no  atone- 
ment is  made.  And  what  the  general  good  requires,  divine  good- 
ness requires,  and  what  the  general  good  forbids,  the  divine  good- 
ness forbids.  And  as  it  is  allowed  in  the  case  now  put  that  the 
punishment  of  the  penitent  would  be  just,  it  is  allowed  that  the 
general  good,  and  of  course  the  divine  goodness  admits  of  it. 
Therefore  to  hold  this,  and  at  the  same  time  to  hold  that  tbe  di- 
vine goodness  does  not  admit  of  it,  is  to  hold  a  contradiction. 

Such  is  our  reasoning.     If  it  be  just,  several  inferences  follow. 

1 .  That  there  is  no  evidence  from  reason,  that  the  penitent 
will,  on  the  bare  ground  of  his  repentance,  escape  punishment, 
but  abundant  evidence  to  the  contrary.  This  fundamental  doc- 
trine of  infidelity  is  so  far  from  having  any  foundation  in  reason, 
the  law  of  nature,  or  the  divine  goodness,  that  it  directly  contra- 
dicts them  all,  and  is  irreconcilable  with  them.  Therefore  let  in- 
fidels no  more  plead  any  of  these  in  support  of  this  favorite  and 


NO  GROUND  OF  PARDON.  257 

fundamental  principle  of  their  system.  Let  them  allow  that  they 
hold  this  system,  not  because  it  can  be  supported  by  reason,  by 
the  law  of  nature,  or  the  divine  goodness,  but  because  they  derive 
much  ease  and  comfort  from  it,  as  it  quiets  their  fearful  appre- 
hensions of  future  punishment,  and  therefore  they  will  hold  it, 
however  contradictory  it  be  to  reason,  to  the  law  of  nature,  and 
to  the  goodness  of  God. 

2.  Hence  it  also  follows  that  there  is  no  advantage  in  infidel- 
it  \)  in  that  very  respect  in  which  its  advocates  flatter  themselves 
there  is  the  greatest  advantage.  The  boasted  advantage  of  infi- 
delity is,  that  it  frees  a  man  from  those  fearful  apprehensions  and 
gloomy  feelings  which  are  excited  by  the  doctrine  of  future  pun- 
ishment as  taught  in  the  gospel.  But  if  bare  repentance  secure 
not  to  its  subject  impunity,  all  this  supposed  advantage  of  infi- 
delity fails ;  and  the  infidel  knows  not  but  tiiat  he  may  be  in  the 
same  awful  state  in  which  the  gospel  declares  that  all  those  shall 
be  who  are  not  interested  in  the  atonement ;  and  he  has  abun- 
dant reason  for  all  those  gloomy  feelings  and  fearful  apprehen- 
sions, which,  as  he  pretends,  are  naturally  excited  by  the  gospel, 
so  that  to  become  an  infidel  on  this  ground  is  to  act  with  folly. 
And  still  more  is  it  the  part  of  folly  to  embrace  infidelity,  if,  as 
appears  from  the  preceding  reasoning,  the  divine  goodness  not 
only  does  not  secure  impunity  to  the  penitent  without  an  atone- 
ment, but  forbids  it  as  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  good  of  God's 
kingdom,  or  of  the  great  system  of  being. 

3.  We  may  also  infer,  from  what  has  been  said,  the  necessity 
of  an  atonement  for  si7i.  If  there  be  no  foundation  to  expect 
the  forgiveness  of  sin  on  bare  repentance,  the  necessity  of  an 
atonement  in  order  to  its  forgiveness  follows  of  course. 

4.  Therefore  since  an  atonement  is  necessary,  and  since  one 
which  is  all-sufficient  is  provided  and  offered  in  the  gospel,  let 
us  joyfully  and  thankfully  receive  it,  and  make  that  the  only  foun- 
dation of  our  hope.  It  is  an  all-sufficient  and  glorious  founda- 
tion. The  author  of  it  is  none  other  than  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God,  equal  with  the  father,  and  one 
with  him.  In  him  we  may  safely  trust.  He  will  never  leave,  nor 
forsake  us.  Nor  can  we  with  the  least  safety  depend  on  any 
other.  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay,  than  that  is  laid, 
which  is  Jesus  Christ."     Build  here,  and  you  are  safe  forever  ! 


SERMON   XVI. 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.* 

1  Cor.  1 :  30. — Of  him  are  ye  in   Christ  Jesiis,  who  of  God  is  made  unto 
us, — righteousness. 

Every  truth  ought  to  be  made  the  object  of  our  attention  in 
proportion  to  its  importance.  And  though  all  the  doctrines  of 
the  gospel  are  important,  yet  some  are  more  so  than  others.  The 
doctrines  of  the  present  fallen  state  of  mankind  ;  of  the  possibility 
and  mode  of  salvation  by  Christ ;  of  the  necessity  of  union  to 
him,  and  of  justification  through  him  :  these  are  among  the  most 
important  truths  implied  in  the  words  of  our  text.  Particularly 
it  is  there  implied,  1.  That  all  real  christians  are  in  Christ:  "of 
him  are  ye  in  Christ  Jesus ;"  that  is,  ye  Corinthian  converts,  and 
doubtless  all  other  real  converts  to  the  christian  faith  ;  and  2.  That 
in  and  through  Christ  all  real  believers  obtain  righteousness  or 
justification  :  "  Who  of  God  is  made  unto  us,  righteousness."  As 
the  doctrines  of  the  union  of  believers  to  Christ,  and  of  justification 
through  him  have,  in  every  age  of  the  church,  been  accounted 
doctrines  of  great  importance,  so  they  are  peculiarly  important 
and  necessary  to  be  thoroughly  understood  at  the  present  day, 
when  they  have  been  perverted  to  the  support  of  several  danger- 
ous tenets  which  are  totally  subversive  of  Christianity  itself.  It 
may  be   useful  therefore,  in  view  of  our   text,  to  inquire, 

] .  In  what  sense  believers  are  in  Christ,  or  are  united  to  him  ; 
and  2.  In  what  sense  he  is  made  righteousness  unto  them,  or  they 
are  justified  through  him. 

I.  In  what  sense  are  believers  in  Christ,  or  united  to  himl 

"  Of  him  are  ye  in  Christ  Jesus."  These  words  doubtless 
point  out  a  peculiar  relation  between  Christ  and  believers  ;  a  re- 
lation which  is  often  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament.  John 
15:  5,  "I  am  the  vine;  ye  are  the  branches.  He  that  abideth 
in  me  and  I  in  him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit ;  for 
without  me  ye  can  do  nothing.  If  a  man  abide  not  in  me,  he  is 
cast  forth  as  a  branch  and  is  withered."     John  17:  21,  "That 

*  Preached  before  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  June  19,  1786. 


I 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  259 

they  all  may  be  one,  as  thou  father  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee  ;  that 
they  may  be  one  in  us."  Eph.  1:6,  "  He  hath  made  us  accept- 
ed in  the  beloved ;"  and  chap.  5:  30,  "  For  we  are  members  of 
his  body  ;  of  his  flesh  and  of  his  bones."  1  Cor.  12:  27,  "  Now 
ye  are  the  body  of  Christ, "and  members  in  particular,"  etc.  The 
same  relation  is  illustrated  by  that  which  subsists  between  the 
husband  and  wife  ;  and  the  whole  body  of  believers  is  called  "  the 
bride,  the  lamb's  wife."  But  what  is  this  union  between  Christ 
and  believers  ?  In  what  respect  are  they  one  ?  To  these  inquiries 
I  reply,  there  is  a  two-fold  union  between  Christ  and  believers ; 
a  vital  union  and  a  relative  union  ;  or  what  may  more  properly 
be  called  a  union  of  atfection  and  a  union  of  relation  ;  or  a  uniou 
which  is  real  and  a  union  which  is  constituted.  Each  of  these 
requires  a  distinct  explanation. 

1.  By  a  vital  union,  or  the  union  of  affection  is  meant,  that 
cordial  and  mutual  love  or  affection  which  subsists  between  Christ 
and  all  true  believers.  This  love  is  implied  in  the  true  and  sav- 
ing faith  of  the  gospel.  Every  real  christian  being  tlie  subject  of 
this  faith,  is  therein  united  in  heart  and  affection  to  Christ.  The 
first  act  of  this  faith  is  the  uniting  act ;  and  in  its  exercise  the 
believer  cordially  receives  Christ ;  is  sincerely  pleased  with  him  ; 
loves  those  things  which  Christ  loves  ;  desires  and  seeks  those  ob- 
jects which  he  seeks,  and  in  aftection  becomes  one  with  him. 
He  has  the  very  spirit  of  Christ.  "  The  same  mind  is  in  him 
which  was  also  in  Christ  Jesus."  He  is  also  united  to  him  in  the 
exercise  of  trust  and  reliance  on  him.  He  leans  on  Christ  his 
beloved,  and  lives  by  communications  of  grace  from  him.  "  His 
life  is  hid  with  Christ  in  God  ;"  and  "  the  life  which  he  now  lives 
in  the  flesh,  he  lives  by  faith  on  the  Son  of  God."  This  is  the 
vital  or  real  union  ;  the  union  of  affection  between  Christ  and 
believers.  Faith  has  by  some  been  called  the  hand  or  instrument 
by  which  believers  lay  hold  on  and  receive  Christ.  But  with 
more  propriety  may  it  be  called  *he  act  of  unition  itself,  or  the 
uniting  act,  by  which  Christ  and  the  believer  become  one.  We 
are  also  to  inquire, 

2.  What  is  meant  by  the  relative  and  constituted  union  be- 
tween Christ  and  believers.  This  has  been  variously  explained, 
and  in  some  instances  so  as  to  give  erroneous  impressions.  Some 
have  said  that  the  believer,  in  consequence  of  faith  is  viewed  or 
considered  by  God  as  one  with  Christ,  and  is  treated  according- 
ly ;  is  pardoned,  justified  and  received  to  glory,  because  he  is 
one  with  Christ.  If  the  meaning  of  this  be  that  the  believer  is 
viewed  as  one  with  Christ  in  affection,  and  as  cordially  united  to 
him  in  faith  and  love,  and  therefore  is  pardoned  and  accepted, 


iHt. 


260  CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

this  is  undoubtedly  true ;  but  it  contains  very  little  if  any  impor- 
tant meaning.  It  amounts  only  to  this,  that  the  believer  being 
viewed  by  God  as  united  to  Christ  in  affection,  or  in  faith  and 
love,  or  what  is  the  same  thing  being  viewed  as  a  believer,  is  par- 
doned, etc.  Doubtless  God  pardons  none  but  believers  ;  and  he 
pardons  them  viewing  them  as  being  wiiat  they  are,  that  is  real 
believers,  and  under  no  other  conception.  But  it  is  manifest  that 
in  the  expression  just  mentioned,  something  further  than  this  is 
intended  by  those  who  use  it.  The  expression  is  that  the  be- 
liever, in  consequence  of  faith,  is  viewed  or  considered  by  God 
as  one  with  Christ,  and  is  treated  accordingly.  Yet  in  what  other 
sense  are  Christ  and  the  believer  one,  than  that  they  are  one  in 
affection  ?  None  will  pretend  that  they  are  really  one  person  ; 
that  the  believer  by  faith  becomes  Christ,  and  Christ  the  believer. 
How  then  can  it  be  true  that  God  views  and  considers  them  as 
one  ?  Does  God  view  or  consider  them  as  one  when  in  reality 
they  are  not?  No!  for  this  is  impossible.  That  he  treats  and 
acts  toward  them  in  certain  respects,  as  if  they  were  one,  is 
granted.  He  in  certain  respects  treats  believers  in  justification, 
as  if  they  had  themselves  wrought  out  the  perfect  satisfaction  of 
Christ.  He  as  completely  acquits  and  justifies  them,  as  com- 
pletely exempts  them  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  and  admits  them 
to  the  happiness  of  heaven,  as  he  would  have  done  if  they  had 
wrought  out  the  perfect  righteousness  of  Christ.  Yet  in  reality 
the  believer  is  not  Christ ;  nor  did  he  work  out  that  satisfaction 
to  divine  justice  which  Christ  effected  ;  nor  has  he  any  righteous- 
ness of  his  own  which  answers  the  demand  of  the  law. 

Some  have  said  concerning  this  relative  union  between  Christ 
and  the  believer,  that  they  are  one  in  law.  But  what  is  intend- 
ed by  this  expression  ?  The  most  obvious  meaning  of  it  is,  that 
what  the  law  demands  of  one  it  demands  of  the  other,  and  what 
it  does  not  demand  of  the  one  it  does  not  demand  of  the  other. 
If  this  be  the  real  meaning  of  those  who  say  that  Christ  and  the 
believer  are  one  in  laiv,  then,  if  they  are  correct,  the  consequence 
is,  that  as  the  law  has  now  no  demand  on  Christ,  so  it  has  none 
on  the  believer  ;  and  that  as  Christ  is  justified  and  accepted  by  the 
father  on  the  footing  of  strict  law,  so  is  the  believer.  But  this  is 
utterly  contrary  to  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament, 
which  asserts  peremptorily  "  that  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  shall 
no  flesh  be  justified"  in  the  sight  of  God.  But  perhaps  some 
may  say  that  by  the  proposition,  "that  Christ  and  the  believer 
are  one  in  law,"  is  meant,  not  that  they  are  one  in  the  eye  of 
the  moral  law,  but  in  the  eye  of  the  gospel,  or  the  new  law  of 
grace,  as  they  are  pleased  to  call  it.     But  this  also  needs  expla- 


'!^tt>^ 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  261 

nation.  For  surely  the  meaning  cannot  be  that  the  gospel  does 
not  consider  the  believer  as  a  sinner  deserving  the  curse  of  the 
law,  and  capable  of  being  exempted  from  that  curse  only  by  a 
free  and  gracious  pardon.  Yet  the  gospel  by  no  means  considers 
Christ  in  this  light.  It  by  no  means  supposes  that  Christ  is  ex- 
empted from  punishment  by  mere  free  grace  and  pardon.  So 
that  it  still  appears  thnt  the  gospel  does  not  consider  or  suppose 
that  the  believer  and  Christ  are  strictly  one. 

It  seems  to  be  supposed  by  many  who  dwell  on  this  subject, 
that  there  is  a  threefold  union  between  Christ  and  the  believer; 
that  first  the  individual  becomes  a  believer,  or  exercises  faith,  and 
thus  becomes  one  with  Christ  in  affection  ;  that  immediately  on 
this,  by  the  divine  constitution,  commences  a  relative  union,  or 
God  appoints  that  Christ  and  the  believer  be  one  ;  and  in  the  last 
place,  that  he  proceeds  to  treat  them  as  one.  But  this  middle 
kind  of  union  I  conceive  to  be  a  mere  imagination.  God  does 
not  ordain  that  the  believer  in  consequence  of  faith,  shall  be  one 
with  Christ,  and  then  proceed  to  treat  him  as  one  with  him ;  but 
in  consequence  of  faith,  though  he  sees  and  knows  the  believer 
to  be  a  person  as  entirely  distinct  from  Christ  as  from  God  the 
father  or  from  the  Holy  Spirit,  yet  he  proceeds  to  treat  him  and 
conduct  towards  him  in  certain  respects  as  if  he  were  one  with 
Christ ;  I  mean  in  these  respects,  in  exempting  him  from  con- 
demnation ;  in  justifying  him  ;  in  receiving  him  to  the  divine  fa- 
vor, and  admitting  him  in  due  time  to  eternal  glory.  Therefore 
the  constituted  union  of  Christ  and  the  believer  consists,  not  in 
God's  view  or  opinion  or  judgment  that  they  are  one  person,  or 
in  his  determination  or  constitution  that  they  shall  be  one ;  but 
wholly  in  his  treating  the  believer  in  certain  respects  as  if  he  were 
one  with  Christ,  and  were  possessed  in  his  own  person  of  Christ's 
merits ;  which  treatment  is  indeed  founded  on  the  divine  consti- 
tution or  determination.  Nor  is  there  any  intermediate  oneness 
between  the  oneness  of  affection  and  the  oneness  of  treatment. 
Now  this  idea  of  the  relative  oneness  between  Christ  and  the  be- 
liever entirely  coincides  with  the  representations  of  scripture. 
According  to  these  representations  Christ  is  the  bridegroom,  the 
husband  ;  and  the  church,  which  is  the  whole  body  of  believers, 
is  the  bride,  the  lamb's  wife.  Now  no  one  ever  imagines  that 
the  husband  and  wife  among  men  are  one  and  the  same  being 
and  person  ;  yet  we  often  treat  them  as  if  they  were  the  same. 
We  treat  the  wife  with  the  same  honor  as  we  do  the  husband, 
and  that  for  his  sake,  or  on  his  account.  And  when  it  is  said 
that  they  are  one  in  law,  or  that  the  law  considers  them  as  one, 
all  that  is  meant  is,  that  in  certain  legal  respects  and  proceedings 

Vol.  II.  23 


262  CHRIST  OUK  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

they  are  treated  as  if  they  were  one,  and  as  if  what  is  done  by 
one  of  them,  were  done  by  the  other  or  by  both.  At  the  same 
time,  the  judge  and  other  officers  of  the  law  never  think  or  ima- 
gine that  they  are  really  one  and  the  same  person. 

Again,  Christ  calls  himself  the  friend  of  his  disciples.  "  Ye 
are  my  friends  if  ye  do  whatsoever  I  command  you.  Henceforth 
I  call  you  not  servants,  but  1  have  called  you  friends."  Now 
between  friends  there  is  a  real  and  sincere  oneness  of  atTection, 
and  it  is  sometimes  said  that  we  consider  one  of  two  friends  as 
being  the  other,  or  as  being  the  same  as  the  other.  But  such 
expressions  never  mean  that  it  is  our  real  opinion  that  one  is  the 
other;  but  merely  that  we  ti'eat  one  with  the  same  respect  and 
kindness  as  we  should  the  other  if  he  were  present.  The  ex- 
pression wholly  refers  to  the  identity  of  treatment,  and  not  to  any 
belief  on  our  part  that  the  two  are  in  fact  one — that  there  is  a  real 
identity.     But  I  am  to  inquire, 

II.  In  what  sense  Christ  is  made  righteousness  to  believer's^ 
or  in  what  sense  they  are  justified  through  him. 

Here  I  purpose,  1.  To  inquire  into  the  meaning  of  the  term 
justification  ;  2.  To  show  in  what  sense  we  are  not  justified  by 
our  own  good  works ;  and  3.  In  what  sense  we  are  justified 
through  Christ. 

1.  What  is  the  meaning  of  the  term  justification,  as  it  is  used 
in  the  New  Testament  ?  It  is  a  matter  of  importance  that  we 
affix  right  ideas  to  this  term  ;  for  I  doubt  not  that  the  very  term 
itself,  from  its  common  acceptation,  may  have  given  occasion  ta 
erroneous  sentiments  as  to  this  important  doctrine.  It  is  said  that 
justification  is  a  forensic  term,  originally  and  primarily  used  in 
civil  courts  ;  and  this  is  undoubtedly  true.  A  man  is  said  to  be 
justified  in  a  civil  court,  when  in  consequence  of  a  fair  trial  it  ap- 
pears that  he  is  innocent,  or  that  he  has  not  broken  the  law  by 
which  he  has  been  tried.  In  this  case  he  is  declared  to  be  inno- 
cent, or  is  justified  and  acquitted  on  the  footing  of  justice  and 
merit,  not  of  grace ;  nor  has  the  judge  any  right  to  condemn 
him.  On  the  contrary  the  individual  has  a  right,  on  the  ground 
of  personal  innocence,  to  demand  acquittal  or  justification  ;  and 
to  condemn  him  would  be  gross  injury  and  oppression.  This  is 
justification  in  the  civil  courts,  and  in  the  original  and  most  strict 
sense  of  the  word. 

But  the  same  word  is  used  in  a  very  diflferent  sense  in  the  gos- 
pel ;  if  it  were  not,  it  would  be  wholly  inconsistent  with  that 
gospel,  and  with  the  grace  of  it.  The  justification  of  the  civil 
courts  is  an  act  of  pure  laiv  and  justice  ;  but  the  justification  of 
the  gospel  is  an  act  of  pure  grace  or  favor.    Rom.  3:  24,  "  Being 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  263 

justified  freely  by  his  grace,  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Je- 
sus Christ."  The  justification  of  the  civil  courts  includes  no 
pardon  at  all ;  but  pardon  is  an  essential  part  of  the  justification 
of  the  gospel.  To  justify  a  man  who  upon  trial  is  found  to  be 
guilty,  and  justly  to  deserve  punishment  for  certain  high  crimes 
which  he  has  actually  committed,  would  be,  in  the  estimation  and 
language  of  our  civil  courts,  an  absolute  absurdity.  But  in  the 
estimation  and  language  of  the  gospel  it  is  no  absurdity  at  all. 
Therefore  we  must  always  carefully  distinguish  between  the 
sense  of  the  words  "justify"  and  "justification"  in  the  common 
language  of  mankind  and  with  regard  to  the  violations  of  human 
laws,  and  the  sense  of  the  same  words  as  used  in  the  gospel  and 
with  regard  to  the  violations  of  the  laws  of  God. 

Again,  in  civil  courts  justification  is  the  act  of  a  judge,  pro- 
ceeding according  to  law  ;  but  the  justification  of  the  gospel  is  the 
act  of  a  sovereign,  proceeding  beside  and  above  law,  and  yet  in 
such  a   manner  as  most  effectually  to  support  and  establish  the 
authority  of  the  law.     Doubtless  it  is  the  part  of  a  judge  to  pro- 
ceed strictly  by  the  law  as  his  rule  ;  nor  has  he  any  right  in  his 
judicial  capacity  to  vary  at  all  from  the  law.     But  just  as  clearly 
is  it  the  peculiar  province  of  a  sovereign  to  pardon,  and  to  "  have 
mercy  on   whom  he  will  have  mercy."     So  that  though  it  has 
been  said  by  divines  of  eminence,  that  the  justification  of  the  gos- 
pel is  tlie  act  of  a  judge  proceeding  according  to  law,  it  is  plainly 
a  mistake,  and  such  a  mistake  as  is  plainly  subversive  of  the  grace 
.  of  the  gospel.     For  if  any  man  be  justified  by  his  divine  judge 
proceeding  according  to  law,  then  plainly  he  is  justified  by  the 
deeds  of  the  law,  and  not  by  the  grace  of  the  gospel.     It  is  true, 
indeed,  that,  in  the  general  judgment,  Christ  the  judge  will  jus- 
tify all  believers  ;   yet  in  justifying  them  he  will  proceed  not 
strictly  according  to  law,  but  according  to  the  promise  of  the  free 
and  sovereign  grace  of  the  gospel.     We  shall  all  be  tried  by  our 
final  judge  ;  but  we  shall  be  tried  by  two  different  rules  or  con- 
stitutions.    Those  who  shall  have  laid   hold  on  the  grace  and 
promises  of  the  gospel,  will  be  mercifully  acquitted  according  to 
that  grace  and  those  promises.     Those  who  shall  not  have  laid 
hold  on  that  grace,  still  standing  on  the  footing  of  the  law,  will 
be  judged  strictly  by  the  law. 

Some  have  said  that  justification  is  a  sentence  pronouncing  a 
man  to  be  perfectly  righteous,  or  to  stand  perfectly  right  with 
respect  to  the  law  ;  and  that  this  sentence  is  according  to  strict 
truth,  as  every  believer  does  stand  perfectly  right  with  regard  to 
the  divine  law.  But  if  the  meaning  of  these  propositions  be,  that 
the  believer  in  his  own  person  is  perfectly  righteous,  or  stands 


264  CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSiSrESS. 

perfectly  right  with  regard  to  the  divine  law,  that  doctrine,  if  cor- 
rect, would  entirely  supersede  the  necessity  of  Christ's  satisfac- 
tion, and  overthrow  the  whole  gospel.  Surely  he  who  in  his 
own  person  stands  right  with  respect  to  the  law,  or  is  perfectly 
righteous,  has  no  need  of  satisfaction  to  be  made  for  his  sins  by 
another.  Or  if  the  meaning  of  tliese  propositions  be,  that  the 
believer  is  righteous  with  Christ's  righteousness,  or  that  he  stands 
right  with  respect  to  the  divine  law  by  reason  of  Christ's  satisfac- 
tion, then  they  amount  merely  to  this,  that  Christ  has  satisfied  the 
law  on  his  behalf,  and  that  he  for  Christ's  sake,  is  justified  and 
saved.  But  this  can  never  warrant  the  expression,  that  the  be- 
liever stands  perfectly  right  with  respect  to  the  law,  when  the  law 
entirely  condemns  him  ;  or  that  he  is  perfectly  righteous,  when  in 
himself  he  is  poor  and  miserable  and  guilty. 

In  opposition  to  all  this  it  may  be  urged,  that  it  is  true  the  be- 
liever has  no  righteousness  of  his  own,  distinct  from  that  of  Christ, 
to  meet  the  demands  of  the  law,  but  that  still  Christ's  righteous- 
ness is  his  righteousness,  and  that  Christ  and  he  are  one  ;  that 
all  personal  identity  depends  on  the  divine  constitution,  and  that 
by  the  divine  constitution,  Christ  and  the  believer  are  one  person. 
But  in  answer  to  this  I  need  not  say  anything,  as  it  wholly  de- 
pends on  the  nature  of  that  oneness  which  subsists  between  Christ 
and  the  believer,  and  which  I  have  already  endeavored  to  illus- 
trate. I  shall  only  observe,  that  it  is  granted  that  personal  iden- 
tity depends  on  the  divine  constitution.  But  it  is  not  granted 
that  there  is  any  divine  constitution  making  Christ  and  the  be- 
liever one  and  the  same  person.  It  is  only  admitted  that  the 
constituted  oneness  between  Christ  and  the  believer,  is  a  oneness 
or  similarity  of  divine  treatment,  and  not  a  oneness  of  person. 

On  the  whole,  the  true  idea  of  the  justification  which  is  men- 
tioned so  often  in  the  New  Testament  is,  that  the  believer  for 
Christ's  sake,  for  the  sake  of  his  satisfaction,  and  in  reward  of  his 
perfect  obedience,  is  pardoned,  acquitted  from  condemnation,  and 
entitled  by  promise  to  heaven  and  all  its  glory  ;  and  thus  is  treat- 
ed as  if  he  himself  had  satisfied  tlie  law,  and  as  completely  obey- 
ed it  as  Christ  has.  Thus  though  the  believer  is  treated  as  if  he 
were  perfectly  righteous,  yet  he  is  not  supposed  or  considered  or 
pronounced  to  be  righteous.  He  is  indeed  pronounced  to  be  free 
from  condemnation  and  wrath,  and  to  be  an  heir  of  heaven  ;  but 
this  is  wholly  for  Christ's  sake,  and  not  at  all  on  account  of  his 
own  righteousness  or  his  own  merits  of  any  kind  whatever.  This 
leads  us  to  the  next  particular  under  this  head,  which  is, 

2.  To  show  in  what  sense  we  are  not  justified  by  our  own 
good  works.     As  to  this  I  would  observe, 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  265 

(1)  That  when  it  is  said  we  are  not  justified  by  our  own  good 
works,  the  meaning  is  not  that  good  works,  and  those  wrought 
by  ourselves  too,  are  not  necessary  to  our  justification.  In  order 
to  justification  we  must  be  regenerated,  and  become  the  subjects 
of  a  cordial  faith  and  trust  in  Christ.  But  such  a  faith  in  Christ, 
is  itself  a  moral  or  spiritual  exercise  of  iieart,  and  therefore  is  a 
good  work.  Besides,  faith  implies  love  to  Christ,  which  is  undoubt- 
edly a  good  work.  And  love  to  Christ  plainly  implies  love  to  the 
whole  Deity.  And  love  or  reconciliation  of  heart  to  God,  will 
necessarily  induce  repentance  for  sin,  and  a  disposition  to  gen- 
eral obedience.  But  all  these  are  moral  aflfections  or  good  works. 
And  we  can  no  more  be  justified  without  them,  than  we  can  be 
without  faith.  And  where  one  grace  exists,  all  the  other  graces 
do  radically  exist ;  and  it  is  not  to  be  imagined  that  faitli  can 
exist  in  the  heart  without  them.  But  that  these  graces,  or 
good  works  are  requisite  to  justification,  the  whole  language  of 
Scripture  implies.  "  Repent  and  be  converted  that  your  sins 
may  be  blotted  out."  "  He  that  covereth  his  sins  shall  not  pros- 
per ;  but  whoso  confesseth  and  forsaketh  them  shall  find  mercy." 
"  Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  "  Let  the 
wicked  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts, 
and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord  that  he  may  have  mercy  upon 
him,  and  to  our  God  for  he  will  abundantly  pardon."  "  If  any 
man  love  not  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  let  him  be  anathema." 
From  these  passages  it  is  evident  that  faith,  repentance  and  love 
to  God  are  essential  prerequisites  to  our  justification  ;  and  of 
course  we  are  not  justified  without  good  works,  but  on  occasion 
of  them ;  so  that  if  we  have  them,  we  are  infallibly  justified,  and 
if  we  have  them  not,  we  are  not,  nor  can  we  be  justified. 

(2)  Again,  when  it  is  said  that  we  are  not  justified  by  our 
good  works,  it  is  not  meant  but  that  God  is  well  pleased  with  the 
good  works  of  believers  at  the  time  of  their  justification,  and  even 
antecedent  to  it  in  the  order  of  nature.  AH  virtue,  obedience, 
or  holiness  is  pleasing  to  God  in  whomsoever  it  exists,  whether  it 
be  in  angels,  in  Adam  as  he  was  in  paradise,  or  in  believers. 
The  good  works  of  believers,  consisting  in  faith,  love,  repentance, 
etc.,  at  the  time  of  their  justification,  have  a  real  moral  beauty 
and  excellence  in  them.  The  same  may  be  said  of  every,  the 
least  good  work,  and  of  the  very  first  act  of  faith,  or  love,  or  any 
other  grace.  God  sees  it  to  be  suitable  that  we  should,  in  order 
to  our  justification,  repent,  and  be  reconciled  to  himself,  and  be- 
lieve on  his  Son.  And  when  we  do  all  this,  he  is  pleased  with 
it  as  with  that  which  in  itself  is  suitable  and  right.  And  being 
well  pleased  with  these  good  works,  he  justifies  him  who  is  the 

23* 


^66  CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

subject  of  them  ;  not  on  account  of  the  merit  of  these  good 
works,  or  on  account  of  any  satisfaction  thereby  made  for  the  in- 
dividual's sins,  (for  there  is  not  the  least  degree  of  merit,  satis- 
faction or  atonement  attaching  to  them,)  but  because  in  them- 
selves they  are  right,  and  he  lias  required  them  of  all.  But 
though  God  is  well  pleased  with  these  good  works  in  the  be- 
liever at  the  time  of  his  justification,  yet  he  is  by  no  means  well 
pleased  with  his  character  taken  together,  nor  is  he  at  all  recon- 
ciled to  it  as  it  is  in  itself.  Its  sin  and  demerit  still  infinitely 
overbalance  its  righteousness  or  moral  excellence.  On  the  whole, 
therefore,  even  the  believer  in  himself  considered,  and  without 
respect  to  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  must  be  infinitely  abomina- 
ble in  the  sight  of  God. 

This  being  a  matter  of  importance,  T  would  illustrate  it  by  an 
example.  A  subject  of  a  most  just,  wise,  and  excellent  prince, 
without  the  least  provocation,  but  from  mere  ambition  or  malice 
against  his  prince,  excites  a  rebellion,  collects  an  army,  and  spreads 
confusion  and  blood  throughout  the  kingdom.  Thousands  of  in- 
nocent persons  lose  their  lives,  and  thousands  more  are  reduced 
to  extreme  poverty  and  distress.  At  length  the  leader  of  the  re- 
bellion is  taken  and  imprisoned.  His  trial  and  execution  being 
deferred  for  some  time,  he  has  opportunity  for  reflection.  By  re- 
flection he  is  brought  to  real  repentance  and  cordial  reconciliation 
to  his  sovereign.  He  now  sees  and  most  explicitly  owns  that  his 
whole  conduct  in  the  rebellion  arose  from  the  most  wicked  and 
abominable  principles  in  himself;  that  the  character  of  his  sove- 
reign is  not  only  irreproachable  but  most  excellent,  and  worthy 
of  the  entire  esteem  and  gratitude  of  his  subjects  in  general  and 
of  himself  in  particular  ;  and  that  therefore  his  rebellion,  in  every 
step  of  it,  was  altogether  unjustifiable,  and  that  he  on  account  of 
it  justly  deserves  all  that  the  law  denounces  agaiust  him.  By 
these  and  other  confessions,  and  by  the  whole  of  his  conduct  and 
conversation,  he  manifests  his  sincere  repentance  and  reconcilia- 
tion to  his  sovereign.  Now  these  his  repentance  and  reconcilia- 
tion, taken  by  themselves,  will  doubtless  be  agreeable  to  his  sov- 
ereign. They  are  reasonable  in  themselves,  and  the  indispensa- 
ble duty  of  the  man,  and  tlierefore  the  sovereign  observes  them 
with  pleasure.  Yet  taking  the  whole  conduct  of  the  man  to- 
gether, the  sovereign  is  by  no  means  pleased  with  it,  but  views  it 
with  utter  abhorrence.  And  as  the  individual  justly  deserves  for 
his  various  and  aggravated  crimes  a  painful  and  ignominious 
death,  so  his  sovereign  may  find  it  necessary  for  the  public  good 
to  leave  him  in  the  hands  of  justice,  unless  some  proper  atone- 
ment should  be  made.     In  like  manner,  though  God  views  with 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  267 

complacency  the  faitli.  love  and  repentance  of  the  believer,  and 
that  in  two  respects,  first  as  in  themselves  agreeable  to  him,  and 
then  because  they  imply  a  friendly  disposition  to  Christ,  and  be- 
cause in  them  the  believer  is  united  in  heart  to  him,  so  that  God 
is  pleased  with  him  as  the  friend  of  his  well  beloved  Son,  yet 
without  a  respect  to  the  satisfaction  and  righteousness  of  Clirist, 
God  is  by  no  means  pleased  with  his  character  in  general,  and 
can  by  no  means  be  reconciled  to  him,  or  pardon  and  justify  him. 

(3)  Again,  when  it  is  said  that  we  are  not  justified  by  our  own 
good  works,  I  do  not  conceive  it  to  be  meant  that  justification 
cannot  in  any  sense  be  considered  as  the  reward  of  the  faith, 
repentance  and  love  of  the  believer.  By  reward  I  mean  any  to- 
ken of  approbation.  It  is  allowed  on  all  hands,  that  heaven  and 
all  its  joys  and  glory  are  conferred  on  the  believer  as  a  reward  of 
his  faith  and  good  works  ;  and  that  in  the  bcstovvment  of  the  de- 
gree of  these  blessings,  he  will  be  rewarded  according  to  his  works. 
Yet  this  reward  is  not  bestowed  on  account  of  his  good  works 
solely  or  chiefly ;  nor  would  it  be  bestowed  at  all  were  it  not  for 
the  satisfaction  and  righteousness  of  Christ.  These  are  the  pro- 
curing and  meritorious  cause  of  that  reward,  without  which  it 
would  not  be  obtained  by  any  one  who  has  sinned,  though  his 
faith  and  holiness  were  ever  so  sincere  and  entire.  Nor  is  there 
any  inconsistency  between  these  two  propositions,  that  heaven  is 
bestowed  on  the  believer  on  account  of  Christ's  merit  solely  as 
the  procuring  cause,  and  that  it  is  bestowed  in  the  way  of  a  re- 
ward of  his  own  faith  and  good  works. 

If  heaven  be  bestowed  as  a  reward  of  the  believer's  faith  and 
good  works  in  general,  why  is  it  not  to  be  considered  as  a  reward 
of  the  first  acts  of  his  faith  and  good  works,  as  truly  as  of  any 
subsequent  acts  ?  Those  first  acts  are  as  real  acts  of  virtue  and 
holiness,  and  as  really  excellent  in  the  moral  sense,  as  any  that 
follow.  Therefore  they  are  as  properly  rewardable.  Heaven  is 
not  bestowed  from  a  regard  to  any  or  all  the  holy  acts  of  the  be- 
liever as  the  meritorious  or  procuring  cause  ;  and  would  in  fact 
not  be  bestowed  as  a  reward  to  any  or  all  of  them,  were  it  not 
for  the  merit  of  Christ.  And  this  merit  being  the  procuring  and 
meritorious  cause  of  the  reward,  God  may  take  occasion  to  be- 
stow that  reward  on  the  very  first  acts  of  faith  and  holiness  in  the 
believer,  as  well  as  those  that  follow  afterwards ;  and  it  no  more 
implies  justification  by  works  that  heaven  is  bestowed  as  a  reward 
of  tliose  acts  of  faith  and  holiness  which  are  first  in  the  believer, 
than  that  it  is  bestowed  as  a  reward  of  those  which  follow.  To 
suppose  indeed  that  it  is  merited,  or  is  bestowed  as  a  reward  to 
the  believer  from  a  regard  to  his  faith  and  good  works  as  the  pro- 


268  CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

curing  cause,  would  be  utterly  inconsistent  with  the  gospel  doc- 
trine of  Christ's  merit  or  satisfaction  ;  and  this  is  equally  true, 
whether  it  be  bestowed  in  this  manner  as  a  reward  of  the  first 
acts  of  faith  and  holiness,  or  of  any  which  follow.  But  if  it  be 
bestowed  from  a  primary  regard  to  the  merit  of  Christ,  and  would 
not  be  bestowed  but  from  a  regard  to  this  as  the  procuring  cause, 
and  if  in  bestowing  it  from  regard  to  this  primary,  procuring 
cause  God  also  takes  occasion  to  manifest  his  approbation  in  a 
reward  to  the  faith  and  holiness  of  the  believer,  still  there  is  noth- 
ing in  all  this  which  is  at  all  inconsistent  with  the  gospel  doctrine 
concerning  the  necessity  and  effect  of  Christ's  satisfaction  and 
vicarious  righteousness.  And  this  is  equally  true  whether  the 
faith  or  holiness  which  is  rewarded  be  that  of  which  the  believer 
is  subject  in  the  first  instance,  or  that  of  which  he  is  the  subject 
at  some  subsequent  time.  In  either  case  it  is  true  that  the  vica- 
rious satisfaction  of  Christ  is  absolutely  necessary  to  the  attain- 
ment of  heaven  and  other  spiritual  blessings,  and  is  the  sole  pri- 
mary and  procuring  or  meritorious  cause  of  them.  Yet  in  be- 
stowing heaven  from  regard  to  this  as  the  meritorious  cause,  God 
takes  occasion  to  reward  the  whole  faith  and  holiness  of  the  real 
believer. 

Now  if  even  heaven  and  all  its  glory  be  given  in  the  way  of 
reward  to  the  faith  and  holiness  of  the  believer,  and  in  the  way  of 
reward  to  the  first  acts  of  faith  and  holiness  as  well  as  of  any 
other,  then  why  may  not  justification  be  bestowed  in  the  same 
way,  and  with  the  same  view  ?  Justification  is  not  a  greater  bless- 
ing than  heaven  and  all  its  glory.  And  as  the  only  meritorious 
cause  of  the  bestowment  of  heaven,  is  the  satisfaction  of  Christ,  so 
it  is  also  of  justification.  And  as  the  faith  and  good  works  of  the 
believer  do  not  at  all  come  in  in  aid  of  the  merit  of  Christ,  to  ope- 
rate in  any  measure  as  the  procuring  cause  of  the  glory  of  heaven 
to  the  believer,  just  so  it  is  as  to  justification.  The  faith  and 
good  works  of  the  believer  are  neither  in  whole  nor  in  part  the 
meritorious  cause  of  justification.  Yet  justification  may  be  granted 
in  the  way  of  reward  to  his  faith  and  good  works. 

On  the  whole,  though  I  conceive  it  is  not  essential  to  the  doc- 
trine of  the  New  Testament,  (which  teaches  that  we  are  justified 
through  Christ  alone  and  not  by  our  own  works)  to  hold,  either 
that  at  the  time  of  our  justification  we  are  destitute  of  all  good 
works,  or  that  at  that  time  God  is  not  at  all  well  pleased  with  the 
good  works  of  the  believer  and  does  not  in  justification  manifest 
any  approbation  of  them,  or  that  justification  is  no  reward  of  the 
faith  and  good  works  of  the  believer ;  yet  it  is  essential  to  that 
doctrine  that  the  believer  is  not  justified  by  his  good  works,  or  in 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  Q69 

consideration  of  them  as  the  meritorious  cause,  or  as  making  any 
atonement  or  satisfaction  or  compensation,  in  whole  or  in  part, 
for  his  past  disobedience,  or  as  at  all  answering  the  demands  of  the 
law  and  supporting  its  authority.  Whoever  thus  holds  that  the 
believer's  good  works  do  not  make  satisfaction  for  his  sins,  can- 
not be  said  to  hold  that  wc  are  justified  by  our  good  works,  or 
"  by  the  deeds  of  the  law,"  in  the  sense  in  which  the  apostle  de- 
nies it.       We  come  now, 

3.  To  inquire  in  what  sense  we  are  justified  through  Christ. 
To  this  inquiry  I  answer,  that  we  arc  justified  through  Christ,  as 
we  are  justified  on  account  of  his  merit  alone,  or  solely  on  account 
of  his  satisfaction  and  obedience  as  the  meritorious  cause.  But 
having  repeatedly  mentioned  this  matter  in  speaking  on  the  pre- 
ceding particulars,  I  shall  not  dwell  on  it  at  present.  I  shall  only 
notice  a  part  of  the  scri|)tural  evidence  of  this  great  and  funda- 
mental truth  that  we  are  indeed  justified  solely  through  the  merits 
of  Christ.  The  expression  merits  of  Christ  is  not  indeed  to  be 
found  in  the  scriptures  ;  and  yet  what  is  intended  by  the  expres- 
sion is  found  there  abundantly.  Thus  R.ev.  5:  9,  "  Thou  wast 
slain,  and  hast  redeemed  us  to  God  by  thy  blood."  Rom.  3:  24, 
"  Being  justified  freely  by  his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is 
in  Christ  Jesus."  Rom.  5:  18,  19,  "Therefore  as  by  the  offence 
of  one,  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation,  even  so 
by  the  righteousness  of  one,  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  to 
justification  of  life.  For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many 
were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  shall  many  be 
made  righteous."  And  in  the  same  chapter,  ver.  9,  "  Much 
more,  then,  being  now  justified  by  his  blood,  we  shall  be  saved 
from  wrath  through  him."  Eph.  4:  32,  '■  Even  as  God,  for 
Christ's  sake,  hath  forgiven  you."  And  as  the  authority  of  this 
last  text,  with  respect  to  the  present  question,  has  by  some  been 
disputed,  it  being  said  that  according  to  the  original  it  is,  "  Even 
as  God  in  Christ  hath  forgiven  you,"  I  shall  add  1  John  2:  12, 
which  admits  of  no  evasion.  The  w^ords  are,  "  I  write  unto  you, 
little  children,  because  your  sins  are  forgiven  you /or  his  name's 
sake,''  Sitt  to  opofta  aviov,  on  account  of  his  name.  By  these 
and  such  like  passages  of  scripture,  we  are  taught  that  the  merits 
of  Christ  are  the  only  procuring  cause  of  justification.  These 
merits  comprehend  his  sufferings  unto  death,  and  his  perfect 
righteousness.  By  the  former  he  made  satisfaction  to  the  law 
for  sin  ;  by  the  latter  he  has  exhibited  to  us  an  example ;  has 
laid  a  foundation  for  his  own  intercession  and  for  the  bestowmenl 
of  justification  and  eternal  life  on  his  disciples,  and  of  all   the 


270  CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 

honors  of  his  exalted  state  on  Iiimself,  in  the  way  of  reward  to  his 
tried,  persevering,  and  inviolate  obedience. 

Having  thus  finished  what  was  at  first  proposed  from  the  text, 
we  may  now  briefly  notice  some  inferences  and  reflections.     And, 

1.  Hence  we  may  learn  the  true  idea  of  the  imputation  of  the 
righteousness  of  Christ  to  the  believer.  It  consists  not  in  sup- 
posing or  thinking  that  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  the  believer's 
righteousness,  but  in  the  fact  that  the  believer  is  treated  as  if 
it  were  his.  Or  if  any  choose  to  express  themselves  thus,  "  That 
the  righteousness  of  Christ  becomes  by  imputation  the  believer's 
righteousness  as  to  tlie  effects  of  it,"  this  is  no  more  than  that  the 
effects  of  Christ's  righteousness  are  the  same  to  the  believer  as  if 
it  were  his  own  righteousness  ;  and  this  comes  again  to  what  was 
just  said,  that  the  believer  is  treated  as  if  the  righteousness  of 
Christ  were  his  own. 

2.  Hence  also  we  may  understand  what  is  meant  by  the  im- 
putation of  the  sins  of  the  elect  to  Christ.  It  consists  not  in 
thinking  or  supposing  Christ  to  be  a  sinner,  but  wholly  in  treat- 
ing him  as  if  he  were  a  sinner  ;  as  if  he  were  guilty  of  all  the  sins 
of  the  elect,  and  in  punisliing  him,  or  putting  him  to  suffering 
and  shame  accordingly.  In  this  sense  "  he  bare  their  sins  in  his 
own  body  on  the  tree,"  and  "  on  him  were  laid  the  iniquities  of 
us  all."  In  this  explanation  of  the  imputation  of  Christ's  right- 
eousness to  the  elect  and  of  their  sins  to  him,  we  avoid  various 
difficulties,  and  at  best  seeming  absurdities,  which  are  otherwise 
inevitable  ;  such  for  example  as  that  there  should  be  a  transfer 
of  guilt  or  merit  from  one  person  to  another,  or  that  one  person 
should  become  another,  or  that  God  should  so  be  deceived  and 
imposed  upon,  as  to  think  and  judge  of  persons  contrary  to  the 
truth. 

3.  This  subject  also  teaches  us  in  what  sense  the  sin  of  Adam, 
is  imputed  to  all  his  posterity.  The  idea  of  imputation  in  this 
case  has  been  more  reprobated  than  in  either  of  those  just  men- 
tioned. That  Adam's  sin  should  be  ours,  and  that  we  on  account 
of  it  should  be  judged  and  condemned  as  sinners,  or  that  we 
should  be  the  same  person  as  Adam,  or  that  God  should  so  con- 
sider or  suppose  us,  has  appeared  to  many  to  be  absurd,  impious 
and  impossible.  But  if  we  conceive  that  our  standing  or  falling 
was  suspended  on  the  standing  or  falling  of  Adam  ;  that  Adam 
having  fallen,  God  permitted  us  all  to  fall  also  ;  and  that  he  so 
ordered  things  that  we  are  liable  to  the  numberless  calamities  of 
life,  and  thus  are  treated  as  if  we  were  sinners  ;  on  such  a  repre- 
sentation, no  man,  I  conceive,  can  fasten  an  absurdity.  Undoubt- 
edly God  who  had  a  right  to  suffer  Adam  to  fall  and  become  a 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  271 

sinner,  had  the  same  right  to  have  suffered  all  mankind  to  become 
sinners  by  their  own  personal  acts,  without  any  reference  to  the 
sin  of  Adam.  And  if  so,  what  can  be  said  to  show  that  he 
had  no  right  to  permit  them  to  fall  in  consequence  of  the  fall  of 
Adam  ?  If  he  had  a  right  to  permit  them  to  fall  though  Adam 
had  not  fallen,  surely  the  fall  of  Adam  did  not  deprive  him  of 
that  right.  But  the  right  remaining,  he  might  exercise  it,  if  he 
saw  fit,  on  occasion  and  in  consequence  of  Adam's  sin,  as  well 
as  on  any  other  occasion.  To  determine  these  things  was  the 
part  of  divine,  sovereign  wisdom  only  ;  so  that  whatever  that 
should  determine  and  establish,  would  be  perfectly  right. 

I  before  observed  with  regard  to  the  justification  of  the  sinner, 
that  it  is  not  the  act  of  a  judge  proceeding  according  to  law  ;  but 
of  a  sovereign  proceeding  on  the  plan  of  free  grace.  Just  so,  I 
apprehend,  we  are  to  conceive  of  the  divine  constitution  by  which 
all  mankind  come  into  the  world  in  a  depraved  state,  that  it  was 
not  the  constitution  or  act  of  a  judge  condemning  and  punishing 
them  for  the  guilt  of  Adam's  sin  ;  but  of  a  wise  sovereign,  per- 
mitting in  consequence  of  Adam's  sin,  all  his  posterity  to  fall  into 
the  same  state  of  condemnation,  and  at  the  same  time  ordering 
them  to  be  born  into  a  world  full  of  calamities,  and  with  bodies 
that  should  ever  be  liable  to  pain,  disease  and  death.  And  as  in 
the  justification  and  salvation  of  the  believer,  God  shows  his  per- 
fect well-pleasedness  with  the  satisfaction  and  obedience  of  Christ, 
so  in  the  dispensation  of  providence  by  which  the  posterity  of 
Adam  are  born  into  the  world  in  a  fallen  and  calamitous  state, 
God  manifests  his  abhorrence  of  the  sin  of  our  common  father. 
Again,  as  in  the  justification  and  salvation  of  the  believer,  God 
treats  him  in  certain  respects  as  if  he  were  one  with  Christ,  and 
were  personally  possessed  of  his  merits ;  so  in  the  dispensation 
of  providence  by  which  all  men  are  born  in  a  fallen,  depraved 
and  calamitous  state,  God  treats  them  as  though  they  had  person- 
ally committed  Adam's  sin  ;  for  the  consequences  of  that  sin  in 
this  life  are  the  same  with  respect  to  all  Adam's  posterity  as  to 
himself.  One  consequence  of  Adam's  sin  to  himself  was  that  he 
became  habitually  depraved  ;  and  the  same  is  the  consequence 
to  all  his  posterity.  Another  consequence  to  him  was  that  he 
became  frail  in  body,  and  liable  to  pain,  disease,  casualty  and 
death  ;  and  the  same  is  the  consequence  to  all  his  posterity. 
Another  consequence  to  him  was  that  the  very  earth  was  cursed 
for  his  sake,  so  that  it  was  only  in  the  sweat  of  his  brow  that  he 
could  eat  bread  ;  and  here  again  the  same  is  true  of  his  posterity. 
In  these  respects,  therefore,  the  posterity  of  Adam,  on  account 
of  his  sin,  are  treated  as  sinners.     And  in  this  treatment  Adam's 


272 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS. 


sin  is  imputed  to  them,  and  in  the  treatment  itself  consists  the 
imputation. 

4.  Hence  we  may  also  learn  in  wliat  sense  faith  is  accounted 
or  imputed  for  righteousness  to  the  believer.  The  imputation 
of  faith  for  righteousness,  as  was  said  concerning  the  imputation 
of  Christ's  righteousness,  consists  wholly  in  treatment,  not  in  opin- 
ion or  judgment.  It  consists  in  treating  the  believer,  in  conse- 
quence of  his  faith,  as  if  he  possessed  a  righteousness  of  his  own 
entirely  answerable  to  the  demands  of  the  law. 

5.  In  this  view  of  the  subject,  we  may  take  occasion  to  inquire 
why  believers  are  said  to  be  justified  by  faith,  or  why  faith  jus- 
tifies and  is  represented  to  have  a  more  necessary  and  immediate 
influence  in  justification  th.an  any  other  grace.  The  reason 
doubtless  is,  that  faith  is  a  cordial  acceptation  of  Christ  and  trust 
in  him.  Therefore  God  has  seen  fit  to  make  it  in  a  peculiar 
sense  the  condition  and  prerequisite  of  justification.  Repentance 
and  love  to  God  are  also  requisite  to  our  justification,  as  I  have 
already  endeavored  to  show.  But  they  are  not  exercised  imme- 
diately towards  Christ,  nor  do  they  consist  in  an  acceptation  of 
him  or  trust  in  him  ;  and  therefore  they  are  not  represented  as 
having  the  same  influence  or  instrumentality  in  justification  that 
faith  has.  As  justification  is  granted  wholly  for  Christ's  sake,  so 
it  was  doubtless  wise  in  itself,  and  seemed  wise  and  good  to  God 
that  it  should  be  granted  to  the  believer  in  such  a  way  that  he 
should  see  and  know  that  it  was  granted  wholly  and  only  for 
Christ's  sake  ;  and  that  as  he  is  really  and  wholly  dependent  on 
Christ  for  this  inestimable  blessing,  so  he  should  be  made  sensi- 
ble of  this  his  dependence,  and  cordially  consent  to  it.  But  this 
is  faith.  Besides,  faith  more  than  any  other  grace  ascribes  to  all 
beings  their  proper  place  and  character.  By  faith  in  Christ,  as 
just  now  observed,  we  acknowledge  and  feel  our  own  entire  de- 
pendence on  him.  We  see  his  glorious  excellence  and  all-suffi- 
ciency, and  our  own  sinfulness  and  ill-desert ;  and  to  see  and 
feel  all  this  is  to  ascribe  to  Christ  his  proper  place  and  character, 
and  to  acknowledge  and  feel  and  assume  our  own.  And  this 
temper  will  naturally  lead  us  to  right  vicAvs  of  Christ,  and  will 
bind  us  most  strongly  to  him.  Faith  also  makes  us  willing  to  re- 
ceive justification  as  a  fiee  gift.  It  disposes  us  to  be  sincerely 
thankful  for  it,  and  to  relish  and  prize  it,  and  all  its  consequent 
blessings ;  and  in  these  respects  also  it  renders  the  believer  the 
proper  subject  of  justification  and  the  proper  heir  of  heaven. 

6.  Hence  also  we  see  that  the  dispute  between  those  who 
hold  to  justification  by  our  good  works,  and  those  who  hold  to 
justification  by  faith  alone,  is  really  a  dispute  as  to  the  necessity 


CHRIST  OUR  RIGHTEOUSNESS.  273 

and  efficacy  of  the  vicarious  satisfaction  of  Christ.  If  tliose 
who  hold  justification  by  works,  hold  also  the  necessity  of  Christ's 
satisfaction,  and  that  that  is  the  only  meritorious  cause  of  our  jus- 
tification, then  by  their  doctrine  of  justification  by  works  they 
can  mean  no  more  than  that  christians  are  justified  on  occasion 
of  good  works,  and  that  they  cannot  and  will  not  be  justified  but 
in  consequence  of  repentance,  and  faith  and  such  other  good 
works  as  they  may  liave  had  opportunity  to  perform,  or  as  may 
be  necessarily  implied  in  regeneration  and  its  fruits.  But  this  is 
nothing  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
alone  or  by  the  the  sole  merit  of  Jesus  Christ. 

7.  Besides  these  inferences  and  remarks,  I  might  easily  pass 
to  several  other  and  practical  improvements  of  this  subject. 
But  time  forbids.  I  would  only  add  that  we  may  see  what  a  sure 
and  glorious  ground  of  hope  and  comfort  the  doctrine  of  the  text 
affords  to  all  true  believers.  It  is  most  safe,  most  gracious,  and 
fully  and  forever  sufficient  for  all  their  wants.  What  a  ground 
too  for  their  gratitude  for  the  Savior's  grace  !  And  by  what  sol- 
emn and  tender  obligation  are  all  bound  to  accept  it,  and  to  live 
answerably  to  it !  And  if  they  do  not,  how  inexcusable  will 
they  be,  to  their  own  consciences  and  to  God  !  How  base  their 
ingratitude  ;  how  vile  their  abuse  of  mercy,  and  of  the  love  and 
merit  of  Jesus  Christ ;  and  how  justly  will  they  deserve  to  be  re- 
jected of  him  when  he  shall  come  in  the  clouds  of  heaven,  and 
with  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of  angels  to  the  judgment ! 
If  they  reject  him  and  his  offered  grace  now,  then  they  will  be 
rejected  of  him,  and  his  indignation  and  fierce  wrath  will  be  upon 
them  forever  ! 

If  then,  my  hearers,  you  would  avoid  this  terrible  doom,  accept 
the  offered  grace  of  Christ  without  delay.  "  Kiss  the  Son  lest  he 
be  angry  and  ye  perish  from  the  way  when  his  wrath  is  kindled 
but  a  little."  To  seek  him  you  have  every  encouragement,  for 
Christ  himself  hath  said,  "  Him  that  cometh  to  me,  I  will  in  no 
wise  cast  out."  "  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way  and  the  un- 
righteous man  his  thoughts,  and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord  and 
he  will  have  mercy  upon  him,  and  to  our  God  for  he  will  abun- 
dantly pardon."  Confess  him  before  men,  and  he  will  confess 
and  acknowledge  you  before  the  assembled  universe.  Receive 
him,  and  he  will  give  you  "  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God," 
and  to  be  made  "  kings  and  priests  unto  him,"  and  to  reign  with 
him  in  glory.  Receive  him  as  your  righteousness,  and  you  shall 
"  shine  as  the  brightness  of  the  firmament  and  as  stars  forever 
and  ever !" 

Vol.  IL  24 


SERMON   XVIL 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED* 


1  Cor.  1:  23. — Bid  ive  preach  Christ  crucified,  unto  the  Jews  a  stumUing-blockf 
and  unto  the  Greeks  foolishness. 

The  Jews  and  Greeks  were  alike  opposed  to  the  gospel.  This 
opposition  proceeded  from  the  same  general  principle,  though 
from  different  pretences.  The  real  reason  of  it  was  the  depravity 
of  tlieir  own  hearts.  Indeed,  this  always  was  the  reason  of  all 
the  opposition  which  has  ever  been  made  to  the  gospel ;  though  it 
may  veil  itself  under  various  pretences,  as  in  the  case  of  the  Jews 
and  Greeks.  The  Jews  required  a  sign.  They  had  formerly 
been  used  to  miracles,  and  the  prophets  had  confirmed  their  mis- 
sions by  miraculous  signs.  They  therefore  justly  expected  them 
from  the  Messiah.  Jesus  our  Lord  had  indeed  wrought  many 
miracles,  more  and  greater  than  the  prophets,  and  sufficient  and 
fitted  to  convince  any  who  were  candid.  And  yet  they  were  not 
convinced.  Nor  would  they  have  been  had  he,  in  compliance 
with  their  demands,  wrought  many  more  and  greater.  The  same 
prejudice  and  alienation  of  heart  from  Christ  and  the  gospel, 
which  had  hitherto  shut  out  the  light  effectually,  would  still  have 
produced  the  same  effect. 

The  Greeks  as  a  nation  were  of  a  different  character.  They 
sought  after  wisdom  ;  were  bent  on  the  study  of  philosophy,  and 
pretended  that  the  gospel  was  not  a  system  of  true  wisdom.  It 
was  not  agreeable  to  their  philosophy  ;  and  as  it  contradicted  and 
condemned  their  depravity  of  heart  and  life,  they  were  blinded  to 
it,  and  it  appeared  to  them  foolishness. 

Just  so  it  is  in  modem  times.  The  same  objections  are  still 
made  to  the  gospel,  and  they  proceed  from  the  same  causes. 
Yet  this  same  gospel  which  was  to  the  Jews  a  stumbling-block 
and  to  the  Greeks  foolishness,  and  which  is  both  a  stumbling- 
block  and  foolishness  to  modern  objectors,  was  preached  by 
Christ  and  his  apostles,  and  is  to  them  that  believe,  the  power 
and  wisdom  of  God. 

*  Preached  at  the  ordination  of  Rev.  Mr.  Cowley  1793. 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  275 

I  propose  from  the  words  of  our  text  to  inquire,  1.  What  it  is 
to  preach  Christ  crucified,  and  2.  In  what  respects  the  doctrine 
of  Christ  crucified,  is  to  many  a  stumbhng  and  foolishness. 

I.  What  is  it  to  preach  Christ  crucified  1  It  is  far  more  than 
to  set  forth  the  mere  historical  fact  that  such  a  person  as  Christ 
once  lived  on  the  earth.  It  is,  I  conceive,  to  preach  the  gospel  in 
general  ;  and  in  particular  to  preach  the  fact  of  Christ's  crucifix- 
ion and  death  ;  the  design  of  his  death,  and  the  necessity  and 
reasons  for  it. 

1 .  To  preach  Christ  crucified  is  to  preach  the  gospel  in  general. 
This  is  doubtless  the  meaning  of  our  text.  Christ  crucified  is  the 
sum  and  substance  of  the  gospel.  To  preach  Christ  crucified  is 
to  preach  that  Christ  is  the  Savior  and  the  only  Savior  of  sin- 
ners. It  is  to  preach  our  need  of  him  and  of  an  interest  in  him  ; 
his  sufficiency  in  power,  wisdom,  merit  and  interest  with  the  Fa- 
ther to  procure  our  acceptance  and  salvation  ;  his  goodness  and 
readiness  in  a  proper  way  to  save  us  however  sinful,  and  to  save 
us  freely,  "  without  money  and  without  price."  It  is  at  the  same 
time  to  preach  up  the  duties  of  Christianity  and  the  necessity  of 
tiicm  to  the  christian  character  and  to  salvation.  For  Christ  is 
not  tiic  minister  of  sin,  but  of  righteousness  ;  and  the  gospel  as 
positively  requires  personal  holiness  as  the  law  ;  nor  is  the  obli- 
gation of  the  law  abated,  or  at  all  abolished  by  the  gospel,  but  is 
confirmed  and  established.  The  gospel  does  not  indeed  require 
obedience  as  the  ground  of  our  justification  ;  yet  it  absolutely  re- 
quires it  as  the  occasion  of  it,  and  as  our  duty. 

2.  To  preach  Christ  crucified,  is  to  preach  the  death  of  Christ 
on  the  cross,  or  to  preach  a  suffering  Savior.  It  is  indeed  con- 
trary to  the  ideas  which  we  should  have  entertained,  that  Christ 
the  Son  of  God  would  come  into  the  world  to  suffer  and  die  by 
the  hands  of  wicked  men.  But  God's  ways  are  not  as  our  ways, 
nor  his  thoughts  as  our  thoughts.  And  in  his  infinite  wisdom  he 
has  seen  fit  to  put  his  own  Son  to  grief,  and  to  cause  him  to  suf- 
fer for  our  sake.  And  in  preaching  the  gospel  these  his  suffer- 
ings must  be  made  known,  and  the  reasons  of  them. 

3.  To  preach  Christ  crucified  is  to  preach  the  design  and  end 
of  his  death.  It  is  to  preach  not  only  the  more  remote  end,  the 
salvation  of  his  people,  but  the  more  inmiediate  end  of  aton- 
ing for  their  sins.  By  atonement  is  to  be  understood  something 
done  or  sufffered,  which  for  the  purposes  of  supporting  the  honor 
and  dignity  of  the  divine  law  and  government,  shall  be  equivalent 
to  the  punishment  of  the  sinner  according  to  law.  Therefore  the 
atonement  made  by  Christ  implies  his  substitution  in  the  stead  of 
the  sinner  who  is  to  be  saved  by  him ;  or  that  he  sufffered  in  the 


276  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

sinner's  stead,  which  as  effectually  tended  to  discourage  trans- 
gression and  excite  to  obedience,  as  the  punishment  of  the  trans- 
gressor himself  according  to  the  letter  of  the  law  would  have  done. 
That  Christ  did  suffer  as  a  substitute  appears  plain  from  the 
scriptures. 

(1)  As  he  is  abundantly  said  to  die  as  a  sacrifice  fo?'  us,  and 
a  sacrifice  for  sin.  Eph.  5:  2,  ''  Christ  also  hath  loved  us, 
and  hath  given  himself  for  us  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  to  God 
for  a  sweet  smelling  savor."  Heb.  7:  27,  "  Who  needeth  not,  as 
those  high  priests,  daily  to  offer  up  sacrifice,  first  for  his  own  sins, 
and  then  for  the  people.  For  this  he  did  once  when  he  offered 
up  himself."  Chap.  9:  22,  "  And  without  shedding  of  blood  is 
no  remission."  Now  as  the  sacrifices  under  the  Mosaic  dispen- 
sation were  offered  to  make  atonement  for  the  sins  of  the  people, 
and  were  slain  in  the  stead  of  those  who  offered  them  ;  so  in  that 
Christ  is  said  to  die  a  sacrifice  for  us,  it  is  implied  that  he  died  as 
a  substitute  for  the  sins  of  his  people. 

That  t!ie  ancient  sacrifices  were  offered  under  the  ISIosaic  dis- 
pensation by  way  of  atonement  for  sin,  is  manifest,  as  by  other 
texts,  so  by  Lev.  1:  2 — 5.  Here  we  are  told  that  the  man  who 
brought  the  sacrifice,  was  to  lay  his  hand  on  the  head  of  the  beast 
offered,  and  it  should  be  accepted  for  him,  to  make  atonement 
for  him.  And  with  regard  to  the  scape-goat,  the  priest,  in  behalf 
of  the  whole  people,  was  to  lay  his  hands  on  the  head  of  the  goat, 
and  to  confess  over  him  all  tlie  iniquities  of  the  children  of  Israel. 
This  transaction  jilainly  implied,  that  those  sacrifices  were  the 
substitutes  of  those  who  offered  them,  and  that  when  the  beast 
was  killed,  the  suffering  and  death  which  the  former  deserved, 
were  transferred  to  the  latter,  and  thus  an  atonement  was  made, 
and  the  substitute  vi'as  accepted  instead  of  the  transgressor. 

Therefore  when  Christ  is  said  to  be  sacrificed  for  us,  it  must 
mean  that  he  was  substituted  and  died  in  our  stead,  to  make 
atonement  for  us  really,  as  the  ancient  sacrifices  did  typically. 
It  is  expressly  declared,  that  it  was  tlie  blood  of  those  ancient 
sacrifices  which  made  the  atonement,  so  far  as  they  did  make 
atonement.  Lev.  17:  11,  "For  the  life  of  the  flesh  is  in  the 
blood,  and  I  have  given  it  to  you  upon  tjie  altar,  to  make  an 
atonement  for  your  souls  ;  for  it  is  the  blood  that  maketh  atone- 
ment for  tlie  soul."  Therefore  we  are  said  to  be  redeemed  by 
"  the  blood  of  Christ,  as  of  a  lamb  without  blemish  and  without 
spot."  And  in  Heb.  9:  8 — 14,  it  is  said  that  "Christ  by  one  of- 
fering of  himself  as  a  sacrifice  for  sins,  hath  perfected  "  or  perfect- 
ly justified  his  people;  and  elsewhere  he  is  called  "  the  lamb 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world." 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  277 

Now  if  we  consider  Christ  as  the  substitute  of  sinners,  as  obey- 
ing in  their  stead  and  thus  making  atonement,  all  this  is  plain  and 
intelligible.  But  if  we  deny  this  to  be  the  design  of  Christ's 
death,  how  can  this  representation  of  it  be  at  all  understood?  I 
know  it  is  said  that  "  Christ  in  his  death  is  represented  as  a  sa- 
crifice, because  the  great  object  of  his  death  was  the  establish- 
ment of  that  religion  by  which  the  world  is  to  be  reformed,  and 
in  consequence  of  which  the  divine  being  is  rendered  propitious 
to  men  ;  and  that  the  death  of  Christ  is  compared  to  a  sacrifice, 
because  he  gave  his  life  in  the  cause  of  virtue  and  of  God  ;  and 
more  especially  to  a  sacrifice  for  sin,  because  his  death  and  re- 
surrection were  necessary  to  the  confirmation  of  that  gospel  by 
which  sinners  are  brought  to  repentance,  and  thereby  reconciled 
to  God."  (Priestly's  Familiar  Illustrations,  pp.  48 — 50.)  But  was 
this  the  object  of  the  ancient  sacrifices?  Was  the  lamb  I'^erally 
slain  from  the  foundation  of  the  world,  slain  to  confirm,  and  give 
evidence  of  the  divine  original  of  some  form  of  religion  ?  The 
sacrifice  of  the  lamb  was  indeed  a  rite  of  religion,  but  what  proof 
was  it  that  the  religion  of  which  it  was  a  rite  was  instituted  by 
God  ?  And  how  (on  this  plan)  did  the  death  of  Christ  establish, 
prove  or  confirm  the  christian  religion,  in  any  other  sense  than 
the  deaths  of  the  apostles  confirmed  it  on  the  supposition,  that 
he  was  a  mere  man,  as  is  holden  by  those  who  deny  his  atonement, 
or  than  the  deaths  of  prophets  under  the  Old  Testament  confirmed 
the  religion  instituted  by  Moses  ?  Christ  did  indeed  die  a  mar- 
tyr to  his  own  doctrine ;  and  so  did  both  the  apostles  and  an- 
cient prophets.  But  are  they  ever  said  to  die  a  sacrifice  for  us, 
and  to  redeem  and  save  us  ?  Or  are  they  called  the  Saviors,  the 
Redeemers  of  mankind  ?  And  are  they  said  to  have  come  to 
seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost  ?  Yet  if  Christ  was  a  Sa- 
vior and  Redeemer  in  no  other  sense  than  that  he  preached  re- 
pentance and  a  religion  which  happily  tended  to  reform  mankind 
and  has  in  fact  reformed  them  ;  why  may  not  the  apostles  and 
prophets  as  properly  be  called  saviors  and  redeemers  as  he  ? 

As  to  Christ's  resurrection,  this  was  indeed  a  confirmation  of 
the  gospel  as  it  was  a  miraculous  and  divine  attestation  in  favor 
of  Christ  and  his  religion.  But  so  was  the  resurrection  of  Dorcas 
a  miraculous  and  divine  attestation  in  favor  of  Peter  and  the  reli- 
gion which  he  preached ;  and  the  resurrection  of  Eutychus  was 
a  miraculous  and  divine  attestation  in  favor  of  Paul  and  of  the 
religion  which  he  preached.  But  neither  Dorcas  nor  Eutychus, 
neither  Peter  nor  Paul,  is  said  to  be  the  savior  or  redeemer  of 
sinners. 

(2)  Christ  is  said  to  be  the  propitiation  for  our  sins.  1  John 
24* 


278  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

2:  1,  "And  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins."  Rom.  3:  25, 
"  Whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in 
his  blood."  A  propitiation,  is  an  offering  made  to  render  a  per- 
son propitious,  or  favorably  disposed  to  some  other  person.  Such 
was  Christ  as  he  offered  himself  a  sacrifice  to  God  to  render  him 
propitious  to  men.  This  directly  teaches  the  substitution  and 
atonement  of  Christ.  But  according  to  those  who  oppose  the 
doctrine  of  the  atonement,  Christ  is  a  propitiation  for  our  sins  in 
this  sense  only,  that  he  taught  and  exhibited  the  most  excellent 
motives  to  repentance  and  reformation,  and  by  these  leading  sin- 
ners to  repentance,  he  brought  it  to  pass,  that  God  became  pro- 
pitious to  them.  But  in  the  same  sense  it  may  be  said,  that  the 
apostle  Paul  and  the  prophet  Isaiah  made  propitiation  for  our 
sins. 

(3)  Christ  is  also  said  to  be  made  sin  for  us.  2  Cor.  5:  21, 
"  He  made  him  to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no  sin,  that  we  might 
be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  him."  If  this  mean  that  he 
was  made  a  sin  offering,  it  confirms  the  doctrine  that  Christ  was 
substituted  for  us  as  a  sacrifice,  and  so  made  atonement.  If  it 
mean,  as  I  apprehend,  that  he  was  for  us  treated  and  made  to 
suffer  in  the  same  manner  as  if  he  had  been  a  sinner,  that  we 
might  be  treated  through  him  as  if  we  had  been  righteous,  it 
seems  more  directly  to  establish  the  doctrine  for  which  we  plead. 
But  according  to  the  scheme  of  those  who  oppose  the  doctrine  of 
atonement,  this  text  must  mean  that  Christ  fell  a  sacrifice  in  the 
cause  of  virtue  as  most  or  all  of  his  apostles  did  and  many  other 
christians  ;  and  so  they  were  made  sin  for  us  in  the  same  manner 
that  he  was. 

(4)  Christ  is  abundantly  said  to  redeem  us,  to  be  our  redeem- 
er, and  to  have  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us,  etc.  He  is 
also  said  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many,  and  a  ransom  for  all. 
This  naturally  means  that  some  satisfaction  was  made  for  us,  in 
consequence  of  which  we  are  delivered  from  bondage.  But  if, 
as  some  pretend,  the  redemption  of  Christ  means  his  delivering 
man  from  sin  only  by  his  precepts,  examples  and  previous  prom- 
ises, which  he  exhibited  as  a  mere  man,  in  what  other  sense  has 
he  redeemed  us,  than  the  prophets  and  apostles  did  ?  And  if 
his  giving  his  life  a  ransom  for  us,  mean  that  he  laid  down  his 
life  as  an  example,  and  for  our  instruction  to  persuade  us  to  vir- 
tue, in  the  same  sense  every  martyr  has  given  his  life  a  ransom 
for  us. 

It  is  pleaded  however,  that  Moses  is  called  a  deliverer  or  re- 
deemer, and  that  God  is  said  to  have  redeemed  Israel  from  the 
hands  of  the  Egyptians,  and  yet  he  did  not  pay  a  price  or  make 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  279 

satisfaction  in  order  to  procure  their  deliverance ;  but  redeemed 
them  by  the  mere  exertion  of  power  and  wisdom.  As  to  Moses, 
as  lie  was  a  remarkable  type  of  Christ,  he  is  properly  enough 
called  a  redeemer.  He  remarkably  represented  Christ  in  many 
parts  of  his  redemption,  though  not  in  making  atonement.  And 
the  deliverance  of  the  Israelites  from  Egypt  was  a  remarkable 
type  of  the  deliverance  and  salvation  of  the  Church,  the  spiritual 
Israel,  and  therefore  may  properly  be  called  a  redemption  ;  though 
it  does  not  represent  it  in  every  particular,  and  especially  in  this, 
that  an  atonement  was  made  in  order  to  the  redemption  of  the 
church. 

(5)  Christ  is  said  to  bear  the  sins  of  men.  Isaiah  53:  11, 
"  He  shall  bear  their  iniquities."  1  Pet.  2:  24,  "  Who  his  own 
self,  bare  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree."  Heb.  9:  28, 
"  So  Christ  was  once  offered,  to  bear  the  sins  of  many."  Sup- 
posing as  the  adversaries  of  the  doctrine  of  the  atonement  con- 
tend, that  the  word  "  bear"  means  to  remove,  yet  how  was  Christ 
offered  to  remove  the  iniquities  of  men  in  any  other  sense  than 
all  martyrs  are,  unless  it  be  this,  that  he  was  offered  to  remove 
the  guilt  of  their  sin,  or  their  liableness  to  punishment,  by  mak- 
ing a  proper  atonement  ?  And  in  what  other  sense  did  he, 
agreeably  to  Peter's  declaration  bear  our  sins  in  his  own  body  on 
the  tree,  unless  we  will  say  that  Peter  himself  too  bare  our  sins 
in  his  own  body  on  the  tree,  when  he  was  crucified?  If  Christ 
bare  our  sins  in  his  body  on  the  tree  in  this  sense  only,  that  in 
his  death  on  the  cross  he  exhibited  motives  to  repentance,  this 
was  done  by  Peter  too.  in  his  death  on  the  cross,  and  by  every 
other  crucified  martyr. 

(6)  Christ  is  said  to  be  made  a  curse  for  us.  Gal.  3:  10, 
"  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  being  made 
a  curse  for  us."  This  betokens  his  suffering  the  curse  of  the  di- 
vine law,  or  what  was  equivalent  to  it,  in  our  stead.  To  say 
that  Christ  was  made  a  curse,  because  the  manner  of  his  death 
was  similar  to  that  by  which  those  died  who  were  under  the  law 
deemed  accursed  ;  viz.,  by  hanging  on  a  tree,  is  to  say,  that  Christ 
died  a  curse  in  no  other  sense  than  Peter,  or  any  martyr  who 
may  have  been  crucified. 

(7)  We  are  said  to  he  forgiven  and  justified  for  the  sake  of 
Christ,  and  in  his  name.  1  John  2:  12,  "  Because  your  sins  are 
forgiven  you  for  his  name's  sake."  1  Cor.  6:  4,  "  But  ye  are  jus- 
tified in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  These  texts  naturally  im- 
port, that  for  the  sake  of  the  atonement  or  merit  of  Christ,  we  are 
forgiven  and  justified.  As  to  the  objection  to  this  construction 
of  these  texts  taken   from  Gen.  26:  24,  "  Fear  not,  I  am  with 


S80  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

thee,  and  will  bless  thee,  and  multiply  thy  seed  for  my  servant 
Abraham's  sake  ;"  and  from  other  texts  in  which  God  is  entreat- 
ed "  to  remember  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and  to  forgive  the 
sin  of  their  posterity  ;"  it  is  to  be  observed  that  God  bound  him- 
self by  covenant  with  those  patriarchs  to  bless  them  and  their 
posterity.  And  when  God  says  to  Isaac,  "  I  will  bless  thee  for 
my  servant  Abraham's  sake,"  the  meaning  doubtless  is,  that  he 
would  bless  Isaac,  on  account  of  the  covenant  which  he  had 
made  with  Abraham  and  in  fulfilment  of  that  covenant,  and  the 
promises  of  it.  And  when  afterward  (Deut.  9:  27,)  Moses  plead- 
ed that  God  would  "  remember  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  and 
not  look  on  the  sin  of  that  people,"  lie  doubtless  had  respect  to 
the  same  covenant  which  was  first  made  with  Abraham,  and  af- 
terward renewed  with  Isaac  and  Jacob.  That  this  was  the  real 
meaning  of  Moses  in  Deut.  9:  27,  is  manifest  from  Exod.  32:  13,  in 
which  the  transaction  is  recorded  to  which  he  refers  in  Deut.  9: 
27,  "  Remember  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Israel  thy  servants  to  whom 
thou  swearest  by  thine  own  self,  and  saidst  unto  them,  I  will  mul- 
tiply your  seed  as  the  stars  of  heaven,  and  all  this  land  that  I 
have  spoken  of,  will  I  give  to  thy  seed,  and  they  shall  inherit  it 
forever."  In  this  we  see  Moses  pleads,  not  the  personal  right- 
eousness or  merit  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob,  as  the  ground  of 
the  divine  favor  to  their  posterity,  but  the  covenant  which  God 
had  made  with  them,  and  the  promises  of  that  covenant. 

It  is  further  to  be  observed,  that  the  Israelites  are  never  said  to 
be  forgiven  for  the  name's  sake  of  Abraham,  or  to  be  justified  in 
the  name  of  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob.  And  the  reason  doubt- 
less is,  that  this  means  something  different  from  pardoning  them 
on  account  of  promises  which  he  made  to  those  their  ancestors. 
To  justify  in  the  name  of  Christ,  or  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Je- 
sus, means,  as  is  conceded  by  those  who  most  violently  oppose 
the  doctrine  of  atonement,  to  justify  "  as  Christ,  or  in  the  place 
of  Christ."  Thus  our  Lord  says,  "  Many  shall  come  in  my  name," 
that  is  in  my  place  or  character,  and  pretending  to  be  what  I  am, 
the  Messiah.  And  again,  "  the  Comforter,  whom  the  Father  shall 
send  in  my  name,"  that  is,  in  my  place.  Now  this  concession 
contains  all  that  we  plead  for.  Believers  are  justified  "  as  Christ 
or  in  the  place  of  Chi'ist ;"  or  as  if  they  were  Christ  and  were 
possessed  of  his  merit  ;  or,  as  some  speak,  as  viewed  and  consid- 
ered as  in  Christ  and  one  with  him.  They  are  justified  in  the 
place  or  stead  of  Cinist,  and  as  if  they  had  personally  wrought 
out  everything  that  is  satisfactory  and  amiable  in  him,  even  as  he 
suffered  and  died  in  their  place  and  stead,  and  as  if  he  had  been 
guilty  of  all  their  sins.     So  that  it  seems,  the  opposers  themselves 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  281 

of  this  doctrine  can  put  no  construction  on  this  scriptural  phrase, 
but  what  fully  implies  the  substitution  and  atonement  of  Christ. 

4.  To  preach  Clirist  crucified  is  to  preach  the  necessity  and 
reasons  of  Christ's  substitution  and  atonement.  It  seems  that 
Christ  did  die,  not  only  as  a  martyr,  but  as  a  substitute  to  atone 
for  the  sins  of  his  people.  We  are  now  to  inquire,  whether  this 
measure  was  necessary,  and  for  what  reason  it  was  so. 

(1 )  We  may  argue  the  necessity  of  Christ's  dying  for  this  end, 
from  the  veri)  fact  itself.  We  cannot  imagine  that  either  God 
tiie  father  or  his  son  Jesus  Christ  would  have  ever  consented  to 
the  death  of  Christ  for  the  end  mentioned,  unless  it  had  been  of 
absolute  necessity.  God  never  does  anything  in  vain  ;  and  as 
Christ  was  his  only  begotten  and  well  beloved  son,  so  we  may  be 
sure  that  he  did  not  delight  in  his  misery,  and  would  never  iiave 
permitted  and  much  less  himself  have  inflicted  it,  unless  it  had 
been  necessary.  With  equal  strength  may  we  argue  from  the 
wisdom  of  Christ,  that  he  himself  would  never  have  consented  to 
endure  the  misery  of  the  cross  if  it  had  not  been  necessary. 

(•2)  We  argue  the  necessity  of  his  death  from  express  decla- 
rations of  scripture.  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay,  than 
that  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  "  There  is  none  other  name 
under  heaven  given  among  men,  whereby  we  must  be  saved  ; 
neither  is  there  salvation  in  any  other."  "  Thus  it  behoved  Christ 
to  suffer."  "  If  there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  have 
given  life,  verily  righteousness  should  have  been  by  the  law." 
"  If  righteousness  came  by  the  law,  then  Christ  is  dead  in  vain." 
And  with  the  same  force  may  we  argue,  that  if  righteousness  or 
justification  came  by  mere  sovereign  goodness  without  an  atone- 
ment, then  Christ  is  dead  in  vain.  For  Christ's  death  was  no 
more  necessary  to  establish  the  christian  religion,  and  by  that  to 
lead  sinners  to  repentance  and  acceptance  with  God  than  it  was 
necessary  to  establish,  and  to  lead  them  to  obey  the  moral  law, 
that  they  might  obtain  acceptance  by  that.  If  then  the  apostle 
means,  that  if  righteousness  came  by  the  moral  law,  Christ  is 
dead  in  vain,  he  is  dead  in  vain  if  righteousness  came  by  repent- 
ance and  reformation.  For  these  are  a  conformity  to  the  moral 
law.  And  he  is  truly  dead  in  vain,  unless  he  died  to  make 
atonement  for  sin,  because  obedience  to  the  law,  repentance  and 
reformation  might  have  been  obtained  v/ithout  his  death. 

Again  ;  if  acceptance,  pardon  and  life,  be  by  repentance  and 
reformation,  then  they  are  by  the  moral  law,  and  in  the  same 
sense  as  they  are  by  repentance  and  reformation ;  for  these  are 
works  of  the  law  and  a  conformity  to  it.  But  the  moral  law  had 
been  given.     Therefore  there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could 


282  CHRIST    CRUCIFIED. 

have  given  life,  and  therefore  by  the  authority  of  an  inspired  apos- 
tle, Christ  is  dead  in  vain  ;  which  is  absurd.  Of  course  therefore 
pardon  and  life  cannot  be  by  repentance  and  reformation  only, 
but  must  be  by  the  death,  substitution  and  atonement  of  Christ. 

(3)  The  necessity  of  Christ's  death  and  atonement  may  be 
argued  from  rational  considerations.  If  repentance,  including 
reformation,  be  all  that  is  necessary  to  pardon  and  acceptance 
with  God,  then  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  good  and  prosperity  of 
his  kingdom  require  no  more.  Whatever  these  require,  and 
nothing  more,  is  necessary  in  order  to  pardon.  But  the  kingdom 
of  God  is  the  universe  taken  as  a  system;  and  the  declarative 
glory  of  God  is  the  highest  perfection,  good  or  prosperity  of  this 
system.  If  therefore  the  good  of  the  universal  system  require  no 
more  in  order  to  the  pardon  of  the  sinner  than  his  bare  repent- 
ance and  reformation,  then  the  glory  of  God  requires  no  more. 
Again,  if  the  good  of  the  universe  require  no  more  than  the  re- 
pentance and  reformation  of  the  sinner  in  order  to  his  pardon, 
then  justice  requires  no  more.  For  whenever  a  crime  is  commit- 
ted against  any  community  and  the  government  of  it,  whether  it 
be  a  republic,  a  kingdom  or  an  empire,  if  there  be  no  substitution 
or  atonement,  the  crime  deserves  just  such  a  punishment  as  the 
public  good  requires.  The  requirement  of  the  public  good  is  the 
exact  measure  of  justice  in  this  case.  Now  therefore  if  the  pub- 
lic good  of  the  universe  require  no  more  of  the  sinner  in  order  to 
his  pardon,  than  that  he  repent  and  reform,  then  this  is  all  that 
justice  requires  of  him,  and  he  justly  deserves  no  other  punish- 
ment than  this.  But  this  is  no  punishment  at  all,  no  evil,  but  an 
invaluable  good.  Therefore  sin  by  which  he  deserves  no  more, 
is  no  moral  evil,  no  crime  at  all,  which  is  absurd  ;  and  consequent- 
ly the  principle  from  which  it  follows,  that  mere  repentance  and 
reformation  are  all  that  is  necessary  to  pardon  and  acceptance 
with  God,  is  absurd  also.  But  if  we  allow  that  sin  is  a  crime,  a 
moral  evil,  it  deserves  some  punishment,  and  the  general  good  of 
the  universe  requires  that  punishment,  and  consequently  does  not 
admit  that  the  sinner  be  acquitted  from  it,  but  in  consequence  of 
something  done  or  suflered  which  is  equivalent  to  vc  hat  his  pun- 
ishment would  be  according  to  strict  justice  ;  and  this  is  the  very 
atonement  for  which  we  plead. 

The  great  plea  of  the  opposers  of  the  atonement  is  that  God's  in- 
finite goodness  secures  pardon  to  the  penitent  in  consequence  of  his 
repentance  only.  But  the  infinite  goodness  of  God  seeks  invaria- 
bly what  the  general  good  of  the  universe  requires,  and  that  only. 
Therefore  if  the  goodness  of  God  require  the  penitent  to  be  pardon- 
ed in  consequence  of  his  repentance  only,  the  general  good  requires 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  283 

his  pardon  in  that  case  and  of  course  does  not  admit  of  his  pun- 
ishment. But  if  the  general  good  do  not  admit  that  the  penitent 
be  punished,  justice  does  not  admit  of  it ;  for  the  measure  of  jus- 
tice, when  no  atonement  is  made,  is  the  general  good.  And  if 
justice  do  not  admit  of  his  punishment,  he  deserves  no  punish- 
ment, and  sin  is  no  crime,  and  there  is  no  grace  in  his  acquittal. 
Yet  the  opposers  of  the  atonement  are  great  advocates  for  free 
grace  in  pardon  ;  and  it  is  truly  surprising  that  they  do  not  see 
their  own  perfect  inconsistency.  Certainly  there  is  no  free  grace 
in  pardoning  that  which  is  no  crime.  And  certainly  that  is  no 
crime  which  deserves  no  punishment.  And  that  deserves  no 
punishment  which,  there  being  no  atonement,  the  general  good 
does  not  require  to  be  punished,  frowned  upon,  or  restrained  by 
some  penalty. 

It  is  further  to  be  observed  that  this  scheme  of  forgiveness  on 
bare  repentance  and  reformation,  overthrows  all  moral  govern- 
ment. It  does  so,  as  it  enervates  and  overthrows  the  moral  law. 
Tiie  moral  law  is  the  law  whereby  God  requires  of  us  a  certain 
course  of  moral  conduct  on  a  certain  penalty.  But  if  this  threat- 
en no  penalty  beside  repentance  and  reformation,  it  threatens  no 
penalty,  no  evil  at  all,  but  a  blessing.  Consequently  it  is  no  law, 
no  authoritative  injunction,  nor  is  any  moral  government  to  be 
maintained  by  it.  And  besides  ;  certainly  that  is  no  rule  of  gov- 
ernment the  violation  of  which  implies  no  moral  evil  and  exposes 
to  no  punishment. 

Any  human  government  in  the  world  would  be  dissolved  and 
all  authority  in  it  abolished,  if  it  were  to  proceed  on  the  maxim 
of  pardoning  all  crimes  on  bare  repentance.  And  as  we  have  no 
other  way  to  form  an  idea  of  God  but  to  ascribe  to  him  in  an  in- 
finite degree  all  the  perfections  of  a  human  spirit,  abstracting  all 
imperfection,  so  we  have  no  way  to  form  an  idea  of  the  divine 
government  but  by  ascribing  to  it  everything  excellent  in  human 
governments  abstracting  all  imperfections. 

Thus  we  see  not  only  the  necessity  of  an  atonement  in  order 
to  forgiveness  ;  but  the  reason  why  it  is  necessary,  which  is,  that 
without  it  the  law  and  government  of  God  would  be  weakened, 
dishonored  and  in  a  degree  at  least  dissolved  ;  just  as  any  human 
law  and  government  would  be  weakened  by  suffering  the  lawless 
and  disobedient  to  pass  with  impunity  and  without  measures  taken 
to  support  that  law  and  government. 

II.  We  come  now  to  consider  in  what  respects  the  doctrine 
of  Christ  crucified,  is  to  many  a  stumbling-block  and.  foolish- 
ness ;  or  what  are  the  principal  objections  to  this  doctrine  urged 
by  the  opposers  of  it.     Of  these  there  are  several.     It  is  objected, 


284  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

1.  That  it  is  incredible  that  Christ,  a  divine  person,  should  die 
for  sinners.  Answer.  If  this  be  incredible  it  must  be  so,  either 
because  it  is  incredible  that  one  should  be  guilty  of  so  great  a  sin 
as  to  make  so  great  atonement  necessary  ;  or  because  it  is  incredi- 
ble that  God  should  have  so  much  goodness  in  him  as  to  be  willing 
to  give  his  Son,  and  his  Son  have  so  much  goodness  as  to  be  willing 
to  give  himself  to  die  for  us.  As  to  the  first  supposed  ground  of 
incredibility,  that  our  demerit  cannot  be  so  great  as  to  require  so 
great  an  atonement,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that  we  are  very  inade- 
quate judges  of  our  own  demerit,  both  because  of  our  ignorance 
and  incapacity  to  determine  in  this  case,  and  because  we  are  al- 
ways prepossessed  in  our  own  favor.  Still,  clear  light  may  be  ob- 
tained on  the  subject  if  we  candidly  attend  to  the  voice  of  reason 
and  revelation.  Once  allow  that  all  men  are  saved  from  some 
punishment,  and  it  follows  that  they  are  saved  from  an  endless 
punishment.  It  is  plain  by  that,  that  whoever  are  saved  are  saved 
by  free  grace.  Now  either  all  men  are  to  be  saved,  or  they  are 
not.  If  all  men  are  not  to  be  saved,  then  some  suffer  an  endless 
punishment.  If  some  suffer  an  endless  punishment,  doubtless 
endless  punishment  is  just  and  deserved  by  them.  But  an  end- 
less punishment  is  an  infinite  evil.  This  therefore  is  deserved  by 
all  men  ;  and  that  sin  by  which  they  deserve  an  infinite  natural 
evil,  is  doubtless  an  infinite  moral  evil.  But  no  wonder  infinite 
sin  or  moral  evil  requires  an  atonement  of  infinite  value.  Thus 
on  the  supposition  that  all  are  not  finally  to  be  saved,  it  appears 
that  sin  is  an  infinite  evil,  and  requires  an  infinite  atonement.  It 
is  not  incredible  then  that  such  an  atonement  is  provided. 

Let  us  take  the  other  supposition,  that  all  men  are  to  be  saved. 
On  this  supposition  all  are  to  be  saved  from  some  punishment. 
This  punishment  is  either  temporary  or  endless.  If  it  be  endless, 
it  is  just  and  deserved  because  threatened  by  a  just  God.  But  if 
we  deserve  an  endless  punishment  sin  is  an  infinite  evil  and  so 
requires  an  infinite  atonement.  But  if  the  punishment  from 
which  all  are  saved  be  a  temporary  punishment,  it  must  be  either 
that  very  punishment  which  some  suffer  in  hell,  or  a  shorter  pun- 
ishment or  a  temporary  punishment  of  longer  duration.  But  it 
cannot  be  that  very  punishment  which  the  damned  suffer,  as  that 
by  the  very  supposition  is  suffered  by  some.  Nor  can  it  be  a 
shorter  punishment  because  as  they  suflfer  a  punishment  which 
lasts  for  ages  of  ages,  of  course  they  inclusively  suffer  one  which 
does  not  last  so  long  as  that.  Nor  are  all  men  saved  from  a 
longer  temporary  punishment  than  that  which  the  damned  suffer, 
and  which  in  the  language  of  scripture  is  said  to  continue  forever 
and  ever,  because  no  such  punishment  is  threatened,  and  there- 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  285 

fore  they  never  were  exposed  to  such  a  one.  So  that  we  are 
necessitated  to  come  to  tlie  conclusion,  that  if  all  men  shall  be 
saved,  they  sliall  be  saved  from  an  endless  punishment.  But 
this  proves  that  sin  is  an  infinite  evil,  and  requires  an  infinite 
atonement.  Therefore  it  is  not  incredible  that  an  infinite  atone- 
ment has  been  made ;  and  the  substitution  and  vicarious  death 
of  Christ  are  not  incredible  on  account  of  the  smallness  of  our 
demerit. 

If  then  the  vicarious  death  of  Christ  be  incredible  at  all,  it 
must  be  incredible  that  God  had  so  much  goodness  as  to  give  his 
Son,  and  the  Son  liad  so  much  goodness  as  to  give  himself,  to 
die  for  sinners.  But  I  presume,  that  all  who  allow  that  the  good- 
ness of  God  is  infinite,  will  allow  that  it  is  adequate  to  the  expres- 
sion of  goodness  made  in  the  gift  of  his  Son  ;  and  that  they  will 
allow  the  same  as  to  the  goodness  of  Christ.  But  (ew  if  any  will 
deny  that  God  is  infinitely  good.  Especially  those  who  declaim 
so  vehemently  on  the  free  and  infinite  grace  of  God,  as  all  those 
do  who  oppose  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  atonement,  cannot  pre- 
tend that  God's  goodness  is  not  such  as  to  afford  the  unspeakable 
gift  of  his  Son. 

2.  It  is  objected  that  the  atonement  of  Christ,  if  it  were  ever 
so  real,  would  not  answer  the  end  which  it  is  supposed  to  an- 
swer ;  viz.  the  same  end  as  was  designed  to  be  answered  by  the 
threatening  and  punishment  of  the  sinner.  This  end  is  the  re- 
straint of  others.  Others  by  seeing  the  sinner  punished  may  ra- 
tionally be  supposed  to  be  restrained  from  that  conduct  which 
brought  him  to  that  punishment.  And  if  their  substitute  must 
suffer  in  future,  they  might,  from  compassion  to  him,  avoid  sin. 
But  when  he  has  suffered  already,  what  motive  is  there  to  re- 
strain any  from  sin  ?  This  is  tiie  objection.  To  it  I  answer, — 
That  though  the  motive  of  compassion  to  Christ  our  substitute 
cannot  now  operate  to  restrain  men  from  sin,  since  he  has  suffered 
already  all  that  he  ever  is  to  suffer,  yet  in  his  death  there  are  other 
very  powerful  motives  exhibited  to  restrain  men  from  sin.  In 
his  death  we  see  God's  hatred  of  transgression  and  his  determi- 
nation to  punish  it,  as  clearly  as  in  the  damnation  of  the  wicked. 
Therefore  if  the  consideration  of  the  latter  tends  to  restrain  men 
from  sin,  why  not  the  former  ?  It  is  true  that  compassion  to- 
ward Christ  will  not  be  a  motive  to  restrain  from  sin,  any  more 
than  compassion  to  the  damned  is.  And  yet  it  will  not  be  pre- 
tended that  the  damnation  of  the  wicked  is  not  a  motive  to  re- 
strain sinners  from  sin.  And  in  the  same  sense  the  death  of  Christ 
is  also  a  motive  to  restrain  us  from  it.  Though  Christ  has  al- 
ready died,  yet  no  man  will  escape  the  curse  of  the  law  on  ac- 

VoL.II.  25 


286  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

count  of  his  sufferings,  unless  he  repent  and  forsake  sin  and  walk 
in  newness  of  Hfe.  And  if  any  presume  that  he  shall  not  be 
punished  because  Christ  has  died,  and  thence  take  occasion  to  be 
remiss  in  his  duty  and  indulge  himself  in  sin,  he  may  be  sure  he 
is  deluding  himself  and  that  he  is  going  fast  in  the  road  which 
leads  to  destruction. 

3.  It  is  also  objected  that  the  atonement  of  Christ  is  incon- 
sistent with  the  free  grace  of  God  in  the  pardon  of  the  sinner. 
But  this  objection  seems  to  arise  from  a  mistaken  idea  of  the  doc- 
trine. To  make  satisfaction  for  another  by  the  literal  payment 
of  a  debt  is  indeed  inconsistent  with  grace  in  the  forgiveness  of 
the  debt.  But  to  make  satisfaction  for  a  crime  by  the  vicarious 
suffering  of  another  person,  is  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  grace 
in  tiie  pardon  of  the  criminal.  For  as  long  as  he  deserves  not 
impunity,  whatever  may  be  the  merit  or  demerit  of  his  friend  or 
substitute,  so  long  his  impunity  is  the  fruit  of  grace.  And  the 
suffering  of  his  substitute  makes  no  alteration  in  his  character. 

4.  Another  objection  is,  that  it  is  not  just  that  the  innocent 
should  suffer  the  punishment  due  to  the  guilty.  If  either  must 
suffer  for  the  other,  it  seems  that  the  guilty  ought  rather  to  suffer 
for  the  innocent  than  the  innocent  for  the  guilty.  Answer.  If 
it  would  indeed  have  been  ever  so  unjust  provided  the  innocent 
had  not  consented,  yet  his  consent  entirely  removes  the  objection. 
Suppose  a  parent  were  by  some  arbitrary  authority  punished  by 
a  fine  for  the  crime  of  his  son,  he  would  doubtless  have  just  rea- 
son to  complain  of  injury.  But  if  the  parent  consents  to  pay  the 
very  same  fine  in  behalf  of  his  son,  no  pretence  of  injury  to  the 
parent  can  be  made.  So  if  Christ  without  his  consent  had  been 
compelled  to  sufter  in  the  stead  of  sinners,  it  might  have  been 
matter  of  complaint  and  wonder.  But  since  he  has  consented 
and  voluntarily  offered  himself  to  do  and  suffer  agreeably  to  the 
will  of  God,  and  even  freely  chosen  it,  there  is  no  foundation  for 
the  objection. 

5.  It  is  objected,  that  "  if  it  was  necessary  in  the  nature  of 
things  that  the  justice  of  God  should  be  satisfied  before  any  sin 
could  be  pardoned,  then  as  Christ  as  well  as  the  Father  is  God, 
the  justice  of  Christ  ought  to  have  been  satisfied  in  the  first 
place,  and  if  so,  ivhat  other  infinite  being  has  made  satisfaction 
to  him  ?  And  if  the  divine  nature  of  Christ  required  no  satisfac- 
tion, why  should  the  divine  nature  of  the  Father  require  any?" 
(Priestly.)  This  is  easily  answered  by  only  explaining  what  is 
meant  by  satisfying  the  justice  of  God.  The  justice  of  God  here 
means  justice  to  himself  as  the  sovereign  and  supreme  head  and 
guardian  of  the  universe ;  and  justice  to  himself  in  this  view,  is 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  287 

justice  to  the  universe  as  a  system ;  and  justice  to  the  universe  is 
tliat  which  secures  the  interest  and  prosperity  of  the  universe.  So 
that  to  satisfy  divine  justice  is  to  satisfy  the  demands  and  secure  the 
interests  of  the  universal  system.  Tiierefore  whatever  secures  the 
general  good,  satisfies  divine  justice.  And  the  divine  justice  be- 
ing thus  satisfied,  the  satisfaction  extends  to  not  only  the  divine 
nature  of  the  Father,  but  equally  to  the  divine  nature  of  the  Son  ; 
and  there  is  no  need  that  another  infinite  person  die  to  make  sat- 
isfaction to  the  divine  nature  of  the  Son  in  particular. 

6.  Some  again  object  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  substitution 
and  atonement  represents  God  as  implacable  and  unmerciful ; 
as  insisting  on  all  that  justice  demands  ;  unwilling  to  recede  at 
all  from  the  rigor  of  justice,  but  exacting  that  to  the  uttermost  far- 
thing.    This  also  depends  on  the  sense  of  the  word  justice.     If  the 
objectoi  mean  that  God  insists  on  all  that  distributive  justice,  or 
justice  to  the  sinner   considered  in  his  own  person  admits,  this  is 
not  true  ;  for  then  he  would  insist  on  his  eternal  damnation,  not- 
withstanding all  that  Christ  has  done  or  suffered.     But  if  he  mean 
that  God  insists  on  all  which  public  or  general  justice   requires, 
this  is  undoubtedly  true,  but  the  objection  then  comes  to  this  only, 
that  God  insists  on  all  which  the  general  good,  the  good  of  his 
kingdom,  or  the  good  of  the  creation  requires,  and  will  not  par- 
don sinners  but  in   a   way  which  is  consistent  with   the  general 
good  of  the  creation.     And  is  this  made  a  matter  of  objection  ? 
Will  any  man   pretend  that  it  is  required  by  the  divine  perfec- 
tions, or  is  consistent  with  those  perfections,  to  pardon  sinners  in 
a  way  which  is   inconsistent  with   the  general  good  ?     This  can 
never  be,  till  goodness  itself  is  turned  into  malice.     Many  have 
very  wrong  ideas  of  satisfying  justice,  as  if  it  were  the  satisfying 
of  a  revengeful  spirit.     But  no  more  is  ever   implied  in   it  than 
is  implied  in  a  good  magistrate's  requiring  satisfaction  to  the  good 
laws  of  the  state.     It  is  satisfying  the  public  good. 

Therefore  so  far  is  the  doctrine  of  atonement  from  represent- 
ing the  Deity  as  implacable  and  unmerciful,  that  since  the  atone- 
ment is  no  more  than  a  measure  taken  by  infinite  wisdom  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  pardon  consistently  with  the  general  good,  it 
represents  God  to  be  as  placable  and  as  ready  to  show  mercy 
as  is  consistent  with  the  general  good  and  happiness,  or  with 
the  good  of  creatures  taken  collectively  ;  and  more  placable,  and 
more  ready  to  show  mercy  than  this,  it  cannot  be  pretended  to 
be  desirable  that  he  should  be. 

I  have  now  finished  what  was  at  first  proposed  ; — have  consid- 
ered what  it  is  to  preach  Christ  crucified,  and  what  are  the  princi- 
pal objections  to  that  doctrine.     In  conclusion  I  would  address 


288  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

the  subject  first  to  the  pastor  elect,  and  then  to  the  church  and 
congregation  over  vvliom  he  is  to  be  placed  as  God's  minister. 

I.  I  would  address  the  Pastor  elect. 

My  dear  friend  and  brother, — Christ  crucified  is  the  sum 
and  substance  of  the  gospel.  That  gospel  you  are  now  to  be  ordain- 
ed to  preach,  and  therefore  you  are  to  preach  the  doctrine  on  which 
we  have  dwelt.  This  doctrine,  that  of  the  atonement,  is  the  very 
essence  of  the  evangelical  system.  Without  it  Christianity  is  not 
essentially  distinguished  from  any  other  religion.  If  there  is  no 
atonement,  if  Christ  came  only  to  preach  repentance,  then  there 
is  nothing  peculiar  in  his  office.  All  the  prophets  and  apostles 
preached  this  ;  and  so  did  even  the  heathen  philosophers.  And 
if  Christ  is  a  savior,  only  as  a  preacher  of  repentance,  why  are 
not  they  saviors  also  ?  In  what  sense  are  we  saved  through  him 
or  by  him  more  than  by  Paul  or  Moses  ?  To  preach  Christ  and 
the  gospel  only  in  this  sense,  is  to  give  up  the  whole  revealed  sys- 
tem, and  to  go  back  to  the  law  of  nature  or  even  to  paganism. 
If  then  there  be  any  occasion,  I  would  caution  you  against  so 
great  an  error.  I  would  warn  you  against  it  as  another  gospel, 
and  as  utterly  subversive  of  the  cross  of  Christ.  If  Christ  be  a 
savior  only  as  a  preacher  of  repentance,  then  Peter  and  Paul  are 
saviors  as  truly  as  he  ;  and  why  may  not  they  be  the  ground  of  our 
reliance  and  hope  as  well  as  Jesus  of  Nazareth  ?  Is  it  supposed 
that  he  was  an  inspired  man  ?  So  were  they.  Is  it  said  that  he  was 
the  better  preacher  ?  This  may  be  questioned.  He  certainly  did 
not  preach  the  gospel  as  fully  as  they  did,  its  doctrines  and  mo- 
tives and  especially  those  drawn  from  a  future  state.  Some  how- 
ever may  say,  "  no  matter  what  we  deny  so  long  as  we  hold  to 
salvation  by  Christ."  But  by  this  they  only  mean  salvation  by 
the  gospel ;  that  is  only  by  repentance  and  reformation.  But 
Paul  and  Peter  preached  salvation  in  the  same  way,  and  there- 
fore we  may  as  well  hold  to  salvation  by  them  ;  and  if  we  go  so 
far,  then  we  may  as  well  hold  to  salvation  by  Seneca  or  Cicero. 
Those  who  hold  to  this  bold  scheme  are  anxious,  they  say,  to  cut 
off"  the  objections  of  Jews  and  Mohammedans,  and  by  denying 
Christ's  divinity  and  atonement  to  prepare  the  way  to  win  and 
receive  them.  But  why  not  proceed  further,  and  take  in  the  Pa- 
gans ?  They  hold  what  these  persons  would  call  the  essence  of 
the  gospel,  repentance  and  reformation  ;  and  as  to  their  polythe- 
ism, this  doubtless  is  only  an  error  of  judgment,  for  which  they 
are  not  to  be  rejected.  Indeed  the  advocates  of  this  scheme  can- 
not consistently  reject  the  heathen  on  this  account ;  for  as  they 
have  charily  for  those  who  hold  to  three  persons  in  the  Godhead, 
that  is  for  what  they  call  tritheists,  why  not  for  polytheists  ?    But 


CHRIST  CRUCIFIED.  289 

I  need  not  caution  you,  my  dear  brother,  against  this  system. 
Avoiding  it,  you  will  preach  the  great  doctrines  of  the  atonement. 
You  will  know  nothing  among  your  people,  but  Christ  Jesus  and 
him  crucified.  This  is  a  solid  foundation  of  hope.  It  is  something 
to  relieve  the  awakened  conscience,  and  to  raise  up  the  sinner 
when  in  the  clear  light  of  God's  law  he  sees  himself  as  he  is,  and  is 
bowed  down  under  a  deep  sense  of  his  depravity  and  sinfulness. 
The  contrary  doctrine  can  never  do  this.  It  can  but  give  a  false 
peace,  and  thus  delude  and  ruin  the  soul.  Therefore,  my  bro- 
ther, not  only  exhibit  Christ  as  an  atoning  Savior,  but  the  entire 
gospel  with  all  its  doctrines  and  duties  in  its  relation  to  him. 
Press  too  the  reception  of  these  doctrines  and  a  compliance  with 
these  duties  ;  for  these  are  the  great  ends  of  all  preaching.  Urge 
the  necessity  of  this  ;  the  obligation,  the  reasonableness,  the  advan- 
tages, the  safety,  the  peace  and  satisfaction  it  will  afford  here,  and 
the  endless  blessings  it  will  secure  hereafter.  Press  these  things 
in  all  their  eternal  weight  and  in  their  immediate  obligation. 
Press  them  by  all  the  motives  God  has  given,  and  that,  whether 
men  will  hear  or  forbear.  As  Christ  your  master  was  a  witness 
to  the  truth,  do  you  bear  witness  to  the  same  ;  and  thus  you  may 
be  the  means  of  salvation  to  many,  and  at  least  will  deliver  your 
own  soul.  Be  diligent  to  do  your  arduous  work  ;  to  do  it  in  ten- 
derness, and  with  your  might.  Be  thou  faithful  unto  death  and 
Christ  shall  give  you  a  crown  of  life. 

II.  I  would  address  the  church  and  congregation. 

Men  and  brethren, — You  have  heard  the  word  of  exhorta- 
tion to  your  pastor.  But  remember  if  these  duties  rest  on  him 
there  are  correspondent  ones  on  you.  If  he  is  bound  to  preach 
Christ  crucified,  and  the  great  doctrines  and  duties  of  the  cross, 
you  are  bound  to  hear,  and  believe  and  practice.  If  these  things 
which  have  been  set  forth  be  the  sum  of  the  gospel,  then  you  are 
to  be  deeply  and  ever  attentive  to  them,  and  to  receive  them  to 
the  salvation  of  your  souls.  These  doctrines  and  duties,  you  are 
to  remember,  are  connected,  and  that  you  have  no  evidence  of 
your  reception  of  the  former  but  in  your  performance  of  the  latter. 
I  know  the  opposite  system  is  flattering  to  human  nature.  To  think 
that  sin  is  no  great  evil  ;  that  there  is  no  need  of  so  great  an  atone- 
ment ;  that  God  is  merciful  and  ever  ready  to  forgive,  and  that 
he  will  forgive  on  mere  repentance  ;  all  this  is  very  flattering  to 
the  carnal  heart.  And  clearly  connected  with  this  are  other  sen- 
timents quite  as  flattering  ;  that  God  is  not  very  strict,  and  we 
are  not  entirely  depraved  ;  that  we  are  naturally  well  disposed 
and  with  proper  attention  and  culture  of  ourselves  we  shall  grow 
up  to  virtue  ;  and  even  if  we  do  not,  that  God  is  merciful  and 

25* 


290  CHRIST  CRUCIFIED. 

never  made  man  to  be  damned,  and  especially  he  never  decreed 
any  to  be  damned,  and  therefore  that  we  all  at  last  shall  be  saved. 
These  doctrines  are  suited  to  flatter  human  vanity,  and  to  puff 
up  self-sufficiency  and  self-righteousness.  But  as  you  will  find 
no  such  flattering  idea  in  the  gospel,  so  you  are  not  to  expect 
them  from  your  pastor.  We  trust  he  is  not  disposed  to  swerve 
from  the  truth,  but  in  all  its  fulness  and  power  to  commend  it  to 
every  one's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God.  We  have  confidence 
in  him  that  he  will  tell  you  the  truth  plainly  and  faithfully,  and 
that  in  all  its  fulness  he  will  onfold  to  you  the  great  system  of 
the  gospel.  It  is  a  connected  system.  Every  part  of  it  is  depen- 
dent on  every  other  part,  so  that  none  of  it  can  be  spared  or  taken 
away  without  its  all  falling  to  the  ground.  Therefore  receive 
every  part,  or  you  will  be  in  danger  of  rejecting  the  whole.  And 
in  the  bonds  of  that  truth  let  me  beseech  you  ever  to  cultivate 
union  and  peace  and  sincere  brotherly  affection.  Do  this  for 
your  own  sake,  and  also  for  the  sake  of  your  pastor,  for  his  use- 
fulness and  your  own  edification,  for  the  honor  of  religion,  and 
the  glory  of  your  Redeemer.  And  may  you  and  he  ever  walk 
hand  in  hand  in  the  truth,  you  rejoicing  in  his  instructions,  and 
he  in  your  growth  in  grace  and  eminent  holiness,  till  you  both 
come  to  the  measure  of  the  stature  of  perfect  men  in  Christ  Je- 
sus. Then  shall  his  ministry  be  joy  to  him  and  a  rich  blessing 
to  you ;  and  when  you  and  he  shall  review  it  at  the  final  day, 
you  shall  rejoice  together  in  it  forever. 


SERMON   XVIII. 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.* 

Hebrews  4:  14. — Seeing  the7i  tve  have  a  great  high  priest,  that  is  passed  into 
the  heavens,  Jesus  the  Son  of  God,  let  us  holdfast  our  profession. 

The  apostle,  in  the  preceding  part  of  this  epistle,  had  spoken 
of  the  sonship  and  divine  nature  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  proved  from 
the  scriptures  of  the  Old  Testament  that  he  is  equal  with  the 
Father,  and  that  divine  worship  is  to  be  paid  to  him.  He  had 
spoken  also  of  the  incarnation  of  Christ,  and  had  shown  that  act- 
ing in  the  flesh  as  our  higli  priest,  he  had  made  atonement  for 
our  sins,  not  by  offering  the  blood  of  bulls  and  goats,  but  by  his 
own  most  precious  blood.  And  having  insisted  on  these  things, 
he  at  length  proceeds  to  make  the  proper  application  of  them  to 
the  christian  Hebrews  to  whom  he  was  writing.  "  Wherefore, 
holy  brethren,  partakers  of  the  heavenly  calling,  consider  the 
apostle  and  high  priest  of  our  profession,  Christ  Jesus  ;  who  was 
faithful  to  him  that  appointed  him,  as  also  Moses  was  faithful  in 
all  his  house." 

Here  mentioning  Christ  and  Moses  together,  he  takes  notice 
of  the  superiority  of  the  former  to  the  latter  ;  the  one  being  faith- 
ful only  as  a  servant,  while  the  other  is  so  in  the  superior  charac- 
ter of  a  son.  Therefore  Christ,  being  thus  superior  to  Moses,  he 
is  the  more  worthy  to  be  received,  and  to  be  believed  and  relied 
on  in  the  great  ministry  which  he  is  carrying  on  between  God 
and  man.  And  on  this  consideration,  he  exhorts  them  to  hearken 
to  his  voice,  and  not  to  harden  their  hearts  against  Christ,  as 
their  fathers  had  against  Moses.  Those  ancient  Israelites  had 
the  promise  of  entering  into  and  enjoying  the  land  of  Canaan, 
but  they  failed  of  obtaining  it  through  unbelief.  They  professed 
indeed  to  believe,  and  to  rely  on  the  Lord  Jehovah  who  had 
brought  them  out  of  Egypt ;  and  in  the  fullest  terms  they  de- 
clared that  all  that  the  Lord  had  said  they  would  observe  and  do. 
But  when  it  came  to  the  test,  it  appeared  that  they  were  far  from 
being  sincere  in  this  their  profession,  and  that  they  were  not 

*  Preached  in  1771. 


292  HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION. 

Steadfast  to  it.  For  when  they  heard  of  the  strength  of  the  Ca- 
naanites ;  that  their  cities  were  walled  up  to  heaven,  and  that 
giants  dwelt  in  the  land,  their  confidence  in  God  was  gone.  They 
feared  to  go  forward  as  he  had  commanded,  and  chose  for  them- 
selves a  leader  to  go  back  into  Egypt.  Therefore,  for  their  un- 
belief and  distrust  of  the  power  and  faithfulness  and  goodness 
of  God,  he  was  wroth  with  them,  and  sware  in  his  wrath  that 
they  should  not  enter  into  the  land  of  rest  which  he  promised  to 
Abraham  and  his  seed.  And  the  consequence  was  that  they  per- 
ished in  the  wilderness. 

From  this  sad  instance  of  the  effects  of  unbelief,  Paul  takes  oc- 
casion to  warn  the  christian  Hebrews  against  this  ruinous  sin. 
They,  like  the  ancient  Israelites,  had  professed  to  believe  in  Christ 
as  their  great  high  priest.  And  fearing  lest  some  of  them,  after 
the  example  of  their  fathers,  might  apostatize  from  their  profes- 
sion, the  apostle  most  earnestly  exhorts  them  in  several  passages, 
and  especially  in  our  text,  to  hold  fast  that  profession,  and  to  be 
steadfast  in  it.  For  though  they  had  hitherto  witnessed  a  good 
confession,  yet  so  well  did  he  know  the  heart  of  man  to  be  de- 
ceitful above  all  things  and  desperately  wicked,  that  he  is  jealous 
over  them  with  a  holy  jealousy,  lest  all  his  labors  with  them 
should  finally  prove  in  vain,  and  they  should  fall  after  the  same 
example  of  unbelief. 

Having  thus  briefly  considered  the  connection  of  the  text  with 
the  preceding  part  of  the  epistle,  I  come  now  to  a  more  particu- 
lar consideration  of  the  text  itself.  Its  exhortation  is  to  the  He- 
brews, urging  them  to  continue  in  their  christian  profession,  and 
to  live  and  act  accordingly.  This  is  the  end  to  which  they  are 
exhorted.  And  the  motive  mentioned  to  encourage  them  to  it, 
is,  that  Christ,  who  is  their  atoning  high  priest,  has  ascended  to 
heaven,  there  to  plead  the  virtue  and  merit  of  his  atonement,  and 
to  make  intercession  for  them.  This  seems  to  be  the  force  and 
spirit  of  the  text.  It  may  be  more  briefly  expressed  int  he  follow- 
ing proposition  :  That  since  Christ,  in  the  character  of  our  high 
priest;  has  ascended  into  glory,  this  affords  abundant  encour- 
agement to  us  to  continue  steadfast  in  our  christian  profession. 

In  speaking  on  this  proposition,  I  would  show  1.  That  all  the 
followers  of  Christ  are  bound  to  make  a  profession  of  their  chris- 
tian faith ;  and  2.  That  the  consideration  of  Christ's  priesthood 
and  ascension  to  glory,  affords  abundant  encouragement  to  them 
to  continue  steadfast  in  that  profession. 

I.  lam  to  show  that  all  the  followers  of  Christ  are  hound  to 
make  an  open  and  explicit  profession  of  their  christian  faith. 

The  apostle  is  here  writing  to  the  Hebrews  of  his  day,  who 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.  293 

supposed  themselves  to  be  the  followers  of  Christ.  What  he  says, 
therefore,  is  to  be  understood  as  applicable  to  the  same  class  in 
every  age  of  the  world  ;  so  that  the  teaching  of  the  text  applies 
to  us,  as  well  as  to  those  to  whom  it  was  originally  addressed. 
From  it  I  would  here  show  two  tilings ;  first  that  all  the  follow- 
ers of  Christ  arc  bound  to  make  some  profession,  which  in  gene- 
ral may  be  called  their  christian  profession  ;  and  second  what 
kind  of  a  profession  this  ought  to  be. 

1.  All  the  followers  of  Christ  are  bound  to  make  some  profes- 
sion, which  may  in  general  be  called  their  christian  profession. 
This  is  plainly  taught  in  the  scriptures.     For, 

(1)  A  profession  or  confession  is  expressly  spoken  of  in  scrip- 
ture, as  the  duty  of  all  the  disciples  of  Christ.  Promises  are 
made  to  those  who  make  it  in  an  acceptable  manner,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  threatenings  are  denounced  against  those  who  neg- 
lect it.  "  Whosoever  therefore,"  says  Christ,  "  shall  confess  me 
before  men,  him  will  I  confess  also  before  my  Father  which  is  in 
heaven.  But  whosoever  shall  deny  me  before  men,  him  will  I 
also  deny  before  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven."  Here  is  an  ex- 
press promise  of  the  future  favor  and  friendship  of  Christ,  made 
to  those  who  in  an  acceptable  manner  confess  him  before  men. 
And.  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  an  express  threatening  that  he 
will  disown  and  reject  hereafter,  those  who  do  not  thus  confess 
him  in  this  world.  But  could  these  things  be  so,  if  it  were  not 
the  duty  of  the  disciples  of  Christ,  as  such,  to  make  at  least  some 
kind  of  profession  ?  No  ;  it  is  impossible.  A  parallel  text  is  tliat 
in  Rom.  10:  9,  10,  "If  thou  shalt  confess  with  thy  mouth  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  shalt  believe  in  thine  heart  that  God  hath  raised 
him  from  the  dead,  thou  shalt  be  saved.  For  with  the  heart  man 
believeth  unto  righteousness,  and  with  the  mouth  confession  is 
made  unto  salvation."  Here  I  need  not  repeat  the  observation 
made  on  the  text  just  quoted.  But  one  thing  I  would  observe, 
and  that  is,  that  the  apostle  here  expressly  speaks  of  "  confessing 
with  the  mouth."  The  language  implies  that  it  is  an  instituted  duty 
that  the  disciples  of  Christ,  as  such,  do  make  an  open,  explicit, 
verbal  profession  of  some  kind  or  other.  From  both  these  pas- 
sages it  is  plain  that  some  kind  of  profession  is  to  be  made  by 
every  disciple  of  Christ,  as  such,  and  that  openly,  "before  men," 
and  verbally,  "  with  the  mouth." 

(2)  The  scriptures  often  speak  in  such  a  manner  as  plainly  to 
show  that  all  the  followers  of  Christ,  in  the  days  of  the  apostles, 
did  make  a  profession  of  some  kind  or  other.  And  if  this  was 
the  practice  of  the  disciples  in  those  days,  who  in  all  they  did  in 
the  worship  of  God,  acted  under  the  inspection  and  direction  of 


294  HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION. 

the  inspired  apostles,  then  it  is  plain  that  we,  and  the  disciples  of 
Christ  in  every  age,  are  bound  to  do  the  same  ;  for  it  is  admitted 
that  apostolic  example  is  equivalent  to  express  precept,  or  in  other 
words  that  it  is  as  much  our  duty,  with  respect  to  all  instituted 
ordinances,  to  follow  the  example  and  practice  of  the  apostles, 
and  of  the  churches  acting  under  their  direction,  as  it  is  to  obey 
their  express  commands.  But  that  it  was  the  practice  of  the  dis- 
ciples of  the  apostolic  day  to  make  a  profession  of  some  kind  or 
other,  is  evident  from  a  variety  of  expressions,  used  both  in  this 
and  in  several  other  epistles.  Our  text  itself  is  very  full  to  this 
purpose.  In  it  the  apostle  exhorts  the  Hebrew  christians  to  "  hold 
fast  their  profession."  But  what  propriety  would  there  be  in  this 
exhortation,  if  they  had  never  made  any  profession  ?  He  calls 
this  their  profession,  or  as  it  may  be  understood,  the  profession  ; 
that  is,  a  profession  which  they  all,  as  christians,  made,  and  which 
was  so  well  known  among  them,  that  it  was,  by  way  of  eminence, 
called  the  profession.  The  like  expression  we  have  again  in 
chapter  10:  23,  "  Let  us  hold  fast  the  profession  of  our  faith 
witliout  wavering;"  and  again,  in  chapter  3:  1,  "Wherefore 
holy  brethren,  consider  the  apostle  and  high  priest  of  our  profes- 
sion ;"  and  still  again,  in  the  sixth  verse  of  the  same  chapter, 
"  Whose  house  we  are,  if  we  hold  fast  the  confidence,  and  the 
rejoicing  of  the  hope  firm  unto  the  end."  The  word  here  ren- 
dered "  confidence,"  is  nuQQtjnlu,  which  signifies  a  bold,  confi- 
dent, undaunted  profession  or  declaration  of  anything,  and  which, 
as  here  used  by  the  apostle,  signifies  a  bold,  undaunted  profession 
of  the  christian  faith.  Thus  commentators  seem  to  understand 
it,  and  one  of  them  (Matthew  Henry)  thus  explains  these  words  : 
"  If  we  maintain  a  bold  and  open  profession  of  the  truths  of  the 
gospel."  On  the  whole,  then,  this  text  seems  plainly  to  show 
that  the  primitive  christians  made  some  kind  of  profession,  which 
was  one  of  their  distinguishing  characteristics  in  the  sight  of  men. 
The  same  expression  we  have  in  chapter  10:  35,  of  this  same 
epistle.  "  Cast  not  away,  therefore,  your  confidence,"  or  bold 
profession,  "  which  hath  great  recompense  of  reward."  Such 
evidence  is  there  in  this  single  epistle  that  christians  are  bound 
to  make  a  profession  of  some  kind. 

But  the  same  thing  is  evident  from  the  other  epistles.  1  Tim. 
6:  12,  "  Whereunto  thou  art  also  called,  and  hast  professed  a 
good  profession  before  many  witnesses."  Tit.  1:  16,  "They 
profess   that   they  know   God,  but  in   works   they   deny  him." 

1  Tim.  2:  10,  "  Which  becometh  women  professing  godliness." 

2  Cor.  9:  13,  "  They  glorify  God  for  your  professed  subjection  to 
the  gospel  of  Christ."     The  same  thing  is  further  evident  from 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.  295 

the  first  epistle  of  John,  throughout  the  whole  of  it.  This  epistle 
was  written  with  the  design  of  convincing  false  professors  of  their 
hypocrisy  ;  and  it  abounds  in  such  expressions  as  these  :  "  If  we 
say  we  have  fellowship  with  him  ;"  "  he  that  sailh  I  know  liirn  ;" 
"  he  that  saith  he  abideth  in  him  ;"  "  he  that  saith  he  is  in  the 
light ;"  "  if  a  man  say  I  love  God,"  etc.  Now  from  these  ex- 
pressions of  the  aposde  it  is  manifest  that  the  early  christians 
were  accustomed  to  say,  declare  or  profess  something,  whereby 
they  were  distinguished,  at  least  in  the  sight  of  men,  from  the 
rest  of  tiie  world  ;  and  according  to  which  if  they  did  not  live, 
they  were,  as  the  apostle  expressly  declares,  "  liars."  For  if  it 
was  not  the  common  practice  of  christians  in  that  day,  thus  to 
make  a  jjj'ofession  of  their  faith,  why  should  the  apostle  take  this 
method  to  convince  iiypocrites  ?  On  the  contrary  supposition, 
there  might  not  be  one  in  thousands  that  did  say  or  profess  these 
things.  It  would,  then,  be  a  very  unlikely  way  to  convince  hy- 
pocrites, as  these  might  not  be  one  in  thousands  that  made  the 
profession,  a  failure  in  the  performance  of  which  the  aposde  de- 
clares to  be  hypocrisy.  The  phrases  used,  then,  not  only  teach 
that  there  is  a  christian  profession  which  all  the  disciples  of  Christ 
are  obliged  to  make  ;  but  also  that  those  who  make  this  profes- 
sion, and  live  not  according  to  it,  are  "liars,"  false  to  the  truth 
and  to  their  own  solemn  vows. 

Having  thus  shown  from  the  scriptures  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
christians  to  make  some  profession  whereby  they  shall  distinguish 
themselves  from  the  rest  of  the  world,  I  now  proceed  to  inquire, 

2.  What  kind  of  a  profession  this  is  to  be.  And  here  I 
would  lead  your  thouglits  to  only  a  few  of  the  texts  already  quo- 
ted. Heb.  10:  23,  "  Let  us  hold  fast  to  the  profession  oi  our  faith 
without  wavering."  This  text  shows  that  we,  and  all  christians 
ought  to  make  a  profession  of  the  christian  faith.  Here  it  may 
possibly  be  asked,  what  faith  is  this  that  we  are  bound  to  profess  ? 
Is  it  the  precious  faith  of  God's  elect,  or  the  mere  intellectual 
faith  that  devils  may  have  while  they  tremble  ?  Such  a  question, 
however,  answers  itself.  Or  if  a  further  answer  be  insisted  on,  I  re- 
ply, that  we  are  to  profess  the  very  same  faith  to  which  the  apos- 
tles exhort  us,  and  which  they  ever  preached.  And  whether  this 
be  the  faith  of  the  elect  or  of  devils,  I  leave  to  yourselves  to 
judge.  The  nature  of  this  profession  further  appears  from  1  Tim. 
2:  10,  "  Wiiich  becometh  women  professing  ^orf/iness."  God- 
liness, then,  we  must  also  profess.  But  what  kind  of  godliness? 
The  answer  again  is,  that  which  Jesus  Christ  and  iiis  apostles 
preached,  the  entire  consecration  of  the  heart  and  life  to  God. 
The  nature  of  this  profession  further  appears  from  2  Cor.  9:  13, 


296  HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION, 

"  They  glorify  God  for  your  professed  subjection  to  the  gospel 
of  Christ."  To  be  subject  to  the  gospel,  is  a  very  forcible  and 
comprehensive  expression,  signifying  a  hearty  submission  to,  and 
compliance  with  all  the  terms  and  duties  of  the  gospel.  The  nature 
of  this  profession  is  further  evident  from  several  of  the  expressions 
already  quoted  from  the  first  epistle  of  John.  By  them  it  appears 
that  the  primitive  christians  were  wont  to  say  or  profess.  "  that 
they  had  fellowship  with  God  ;"  "  that  they  knew  him  ;"  "  that 
they  abode  in  him  ;"  "  that  they  were  in  the  light ;"  "  that  they 
loved  God,''  etc.  And  if  so,  then  it  is  our  duty  to  say  or  profess 
the  same.  And  no  other  profession,  short  of  this,  have  we  any 
warrant  to  make,  from  the  practice  of  the  primitive  christians. 
All  these,  and  indeed  all  similar  expressions,  however  various  in 
words,  yet  in  substance  and  reality  amount  to  the  same  thing  ; 
and  all  imply  real  reconciliation  to  God,  supreme  love  to  him, 
and  sincere  acquiescence  in  the  gospel  of  Christ  as  the  only  Sa- 
vior. And  whoever  can  consistently,  and  with  truth,  make  this 
profession,  will  undoubtedly  share  a  glorious  part  with  the  church 
of  the  first  born  in  heaven. 

Having  thus  seen  that  all  the  disciples  of  Christ  are  bound  to 
profess  him  before  the  world,  we  pass  as  proposed, 

II.  To  the  fact  that  the  consideration  of  the  priesthood  and 
ascension  of  Christ,  is  an  abundant  encouragenient  to  us,  to  hold 
fast  our  profession. 

And  here  we  may  inquire, 

1.  What  is  implied  in  holding  fast  our  profession.  Two 
things  seem  manifestly  to  be  implied  in  it. 

(1)  The  first  is,  that  we  continue  stedfast  and  unshaken  in 
our  profession  of  the  gospel,  even  to  the  end  of  our  lives.  And 
this  we  are  bound  to  do,  let  the  temptations  to  renounce  and 
apostatize  from  it  be  ever  so  great.  These  temptations  were  very 
great  in  the  times  of  the  apostle.  Then  those  that  made  this 
profession,  and  continued  steadfast  in  it,  thereby  exposed  them- 
selves to  persecution,  to  the  loss  of  their  worldly  estate,  and  even 
to  death  itself.  And  by  these  temptations,  some  were  induced 
to  turn  back  from  their  pr:)fession,  and  give  up  their  hopes  in  a 
crucified  Savior.  And  the  temptations  to  the  same  thing  are 
great  in  our  own  day.  For  though  by  this  profession,  we  may 
not  expose  ourselves  to  the  loss  of  worldly  goods,  or  of  life,  still 
we  may  be  exposed  by  it  to  the  reproach  and  contempt  of  men, 
to  be  persecuted  with  their  tongues,  and  to  have  our  names  cast 
out  as  evil.  But  notwithstanding  these,  and  all  other  temp- 
tations, we  must  still  hold  fast  our  professio:i,  steadfast  unto  the 
end.     We  must  set  ourselves  firmly  against  all  that  is  inconsist- 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.  297 

ent  with  our  high  vocation,  and  be  willing  through  good  or  evil 
report,  to  be  faithful  to  Jesus  Christ.  And  if  God  in  his  pro- 
vidence require  it,  we  must  be  willing  to  suffer  the  loss  of  our 
worldly  substance,  or  the  loss  even  of  all  things,  that  we  may  ob- 
tain that  inheritance  that  never  fades  away. 

(•2)  The  other  thing  implied  in  holding  fast  our  profession,  is, 
that  in  our  conduct  and  practice  we  live  up  to  the  profession  we 
have  made.  To  do  otherwise  is  practically  to  renounce  that  pro- 
fession. And  what  does  it  signify  that  we  make,  in  ever  so  strong 
terms,  the  gospel  profession,  if  at  the  same  time  we  give  the  lie 
to  our  profession  in  our  practice  ?  What  does  it  signify  that  we 
"  say  we  know  God,  if  in  works  we  deny  him  ;"  that  we  say 
we  "  have  fellowship  with  him,"  if  we  still  "  walk  in  darkness 
and  do  the  works  of  darkness  ;"  that  we  say  we  "  abide  in  him," 
if  we  '^  walk  not  as  he  walked  ;"  that  we  say  we  are  in  the  light 
and  love  of  God,  if  by  our  fruits  we  give  not  evidence  that  so  it 
is  in  truth  ?  It  is  a  maxim  universally  true,  that  actions  speak 
louder  than  words.  Therefore  let  us  say  and  profess  what  we 
will,  yet  if  we  live  not  up  to  what  we  profess,  neither  God,  or 
angels,  or  men,  will  believe  our  profession.  In  the  express  words 
of  John  we  "  are  liars  and  do  not  the  truth.     We  come  now, 

2.  To  show  how  the  consideration  of  the  ascension  of  our  Sa- 
vior to  glory,  affords  us  strong  encouragement  thus  to  hold  fast 
our  profession.  Here  I  would  say,  it  affords  us  abundant  en- 
couragement to  this  end,  inasmuch  as  the  intercession  which  he 
makes  for  us,  in  consequence  of  his  ascension,  will  be  effectual  to 
secure  eternal  rewards  to  us  if  we  do  indeed  hold  fast  our  pro- 
fession. Christ  has  passed  into  the  heavens,  not  in  a  private  ca- 
pacity, but  as  our  high  priest,  and  as  the  head  and  representative 
of  his  church  before  God.  Having  made  atonement  for  our  sins 
in  his  flesh,  he  is  now  ascended  to  his  Father,  to  plead  the  merit 
of  his  obedience  and  of  his  sufferings  unto  death,  thus  to  procure 
the  application  of  the  blessed  fruits  of  all  that  he  has  done,  to  his 
own  people.  And  all  this  implies  that  they  shall  be  prepared  for, 
and  at  last  received  to  the  same  glory  to  which  he  is  exalted. 
But  this  inconceivable  glory  and  happiness,  he  will  obtain  for 
none  but  those  that  hold  fast  their  profession  steadfast  unto  the 
end.  And  to  all  such,  they  are  sure.  For  such  he  has  gone  to  pre- 
pare a  place,  that  where  he  is  they  may  be  also,  and  that  there 
they  may  receive  their  reward.  This,  then,  is  the  motive  which 
the  apostle  sets  before  us  in  the  text,  to  encourage  and  animate 
us  to  continue  steadfast  in  our  christian  profession,  and  to  live  up 
to  it  in  our  practice.  And  is  not  this  encouragement  sufficient  ? 
Is  it  not  abundant  ?     If  thus  the  sympathies,  and  the  prayers  of 

Vol.  II.  26 


298  HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION. 

Christ  are  with  us,  shall  we  think  much  of  the  trials  through 
which  we  must  pass,  or  the  obedience  we  must  yield,  in  being 
found  faithful  to  our  profession  ?  Shall  not  these  seem  but  light 
things  to  us,  when  there  is  so  glorious  a  reward  laid  up  for  us  in 
heaven  ?  Doubtless  it  becomes  us,  with  the  apostle,  to  "  reckon 
that  the  sufferings  of  this  present  time  are  not  worthy  to  be  com- 
pared with  the  glory  that  siiall  be  revealed  in  us,"  "  For  our  light 
affliction,  which  is  but  for  a  moment,  worketh  for  us  a  far  more 
exceeding  and  eternal  weight  of  glory." 

Thus,  as  proposed,  I  have  endeavored  to  show,  that  it  is  an  in- 
stitution of  the  gospel,  and  therefore  the  duty  of  all  the  disciples 
of  Christ,  to  make  some  profession,  whereby  they  shall  be  united 
among  themselves,  and  distinguished  from  the  unbelieving  world  ; 
and  also,  from  the  scriptures,  what  kind  of  a  profession  this  must 
be.  I  have  also  considered  what  is  implied  in  holding  fast  this 
profession,  and  what  encouragement  to  this  is  afforded  us  by  the 
ascension  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  In  a  word  I  would  endea- 
vor to  improve  the  whole  subject.     And, 

1.  We  may  infer  from  it  that  the  ancient  practice  of  our  church- 
es, in  insisting  that  those  who  offer  themselves  as  candidates  for 
admission  to  them  should  make  a  public  profession  of  their  chris- 
tian faith,  is  entirely  according  to  the  practice  and  institution  of 
the  apostles.  Some  hold  the  opinion  that  the  children  of  chris- 
tian parents,  when  they  become  adult,  may  be  received  to  the 
church  and  to  all  its  ordinances,  without  making  any  profession 
at  all.  But  this,  as  is  evident,  would  at  once  set  aside  the  doc- 
trine which  has  now  been  proved  from  the  scriptures.  It  may  be 
said,  however,  that  their  very  offering  of  themselves,  and  coming 
to  the  special  ordinances  of  the  church,  are  to  be  considered  as  a 
profession  of  their  faith,  and  so  supersede  a  verbal  profession. 
To  this  I  answer  :  that  if  this  be  indeed  the  settled  and  establish- 
ed meaning  of  such  transactions,  and  all  parties  concerned  agree 
to  understand  them  in  this  light,  then  it  is  as  real  a  profession  as 
if  it  were  made  in  words,  and  therefore  is  no  objection  to  the  doc- 
trine maintained.  But  if  it  be  meant  that  any  and  all,  who  are  the 
children  of  christian  parents,  may  enter  the  church  without  any- 
thing on  their  part  which  is  fully  understood  as  a  solemn  profes- 
sion of  their  personal  faith  in  Jesus  Christ  and  his  gospel,  such  a 
doctrine  is  subversive  of  the  plain  teachings  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  if  acted  on,  would  soon  fill  our  churches  with  corrupt 
and  unworthy  members,  who  would  dishonor  the  name  and  in- 
jure and  reproach  the  cause  of  the  Redeemer. 

2.  From  what  has  been  said  we  infer  that  the  gospel  knows 
and  recognizes  no  other  profession  than  this  of  which  we  have 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.  299 

spoken,  viz.  a  profession  of  christian  faith,  of  godliness,  of  sub- 
jection to  the  commands  and  spirit  of  the  Redeemer,  and  of  the 
knowledge  and  love  of  God.  As  to  any  other  profession  of  mere 
morality,  or  speculative  faith,  or  sincerity  of  belief  or  conduct, 
the  gospel  of  Christ  knows  nothing  of  it.  That  gospel  teaches  us 
that  there  is  ••  one  Lord,  one  faith,  and  one  baptism  ;"  and  this  one 
faith  it  retjuires  us  to  profess.  And  as  to  sincerity,  we  read  of  no 
other  but  godly  sincerity  ;  and  this  also  ought  to  be  included  in 
our  profession.  And  no  other  kind  of  profession  does  the  gospel 
teach,  as  that  which  as  christians  we  are  bound  to  make. 

3.  We  may  also  hence  be  impressed  with  the  very  solemn  pro- 
fession that  we  have  made,  and  the  sacred  obligations  with  which 
we  have  bound  ourselves  to  God  and  his  service.  In  making  that 
christian  profession,  which  all  of  us  who  are  members  of  the 
church  of  Christ  have  made,  we  have  professed  the  one  faith  of  the 
gospel ;  that  is,  that  we  believe  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  to  be  the  only 
and  an  all-sufficient  Savior,  and  that  we  come  to  him,  trusting  in, 
and  relying  on  him  as  such,  renouncing  our  own  righteousness, 
and  despairing  of  any  acceptance  with  God  on  account  of  it. 
We  have  professed  to  be  the  disciples  and  followers  of  the  meek 
and  lowly  Jesus,  ever  striving  to  cherish  his  spirit,  and  to  imitate 
his  example.  We  have  made  a  profession  of  godliness,  that  is, 
of  true  piety  and  real  holiness ;  and  of  subjection  to  the  gospel, 
that  is,  that  we  submit  to  the  method  of  salvation  which  is  there- 
in proposed,  and  cordially  and  practically  comply  with  the  terms 
of  it.  We  have  professed  to  be  in  the  light,  to  know  God,  to 
love  him,  to  abide  in  him,  and  to  have  fellowship  with  him. 
Such  is  the  solemn  profession  which  we  have  made,  before  God 
and  angels  and  men.  May  the  Holy  Spirit  enable  us  to  be  faith- 
ful to  it,  so  that  we  may  ever  "  walk  worthy  of  the  vocation 
wherewith  we  are  called." 

4.  Let  us  then  all  seriously  and  candidly  inquire,  whether  we 
have  continued  in,  and  lived  up  to  this  our  high  profession.  Most 
naturally  does  our  subject  lead  us  to  inquire  into  our  state  and 
character,  and  particularly  whether  we  have  hitherto  held  fast 
our  christian  profession.  Let  me  even  lead  your  thoughts  further 
back,  and  inquire  with  what  views  it  was  that  you  at  first  made  this 
profession.  Did  you,  in  doing  it,  act  understandingly,  knowing 
the  full  import  of  the  solemn  transaction,  and  of  all  that  w^as  said 
and  implied  in  it  ?  Did  you  enter  upon  it  in  the  fear  of  God, 
and  with  a  full  sense  of  its  solemnity  resting  on  your  soul?  And 
if  so,  how  have  you  conducted  since  ?  Have  you  lived  as  be- 
comes those  who  profess  godliness  ?     It  becomes  those  who  pi'o- 

fess  godliness  to  practice  it,  and  to  live  in  its  practice  from  day 


300  HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION. 

to  day.  And  such  is  the  nature  of  real  godhness  that  they  who 
profess,  will  practice  it ;  and  whosoever  does  not  practice  it,  is  a 
stranger  to  it.  Further,  have  you  Uved  and  conducted  as  be- 
comes those  who  profess  to  be  subject  to  the  gospel,  and  to  be- 
lieve on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ?  Do  you  show  that  the  spirit  of 
the  gospel,  the  same  spirit  that  was  in  Christ,  is  also  in  your 
hearts  ?  Do  you  obey  the  laws  of  Christ,  and  the  rules  and  pre- 
cepts of  the  gospel  ?  Do  you  show,  by  your  lives  and  conduct, 
that  you  indeed  love  God  supremely,  and  that  you  have  fellow- 
ship with  him  ?  This  is  what  you  have  professed  ;  and  if  you 
have  lived  and  conducted  accordingly,  you  have  hitherto  held 
fast  your  profession.  But  if  not,  then  you  have,  at  least  practi- 
cally, denied  and  betrayed  the  cause  which  you  have  professed  to 
espouse  and  maintain  ;  and  erelong  you  are  to  answer  for  it  to 
him  whom  you  have  mocked  by  your  professions.  But  however 
it  may  have  been  with  you  hitherto,  be  entreated, 

5.  Now  to  comply  with  the  exhortation  of  the  apostle  in  the 
text.  Be  exhorted  to  hold  fast  your  profession,  and  to  live  ac- 
cording to  it.     And  as  motives  to  this,  consider, 

(1)  That  unless  you  do  this,  you  have  no  evidence  that  you 
are  the  disciples  of  Christ.  Defect  in  this  one  point  is  enough  to 
counterbalance  all  other  evidences.  Without  it  you  have  no  suf- 
ficient evidence  of  discipleship,  either  to  your  own  minds,  or  to 
the  view  of  others.  1  John  2:  3 — 5,  "  And  hereby  we  do  know 
that  we  know  him,  if  we  keep  his  commandments.  He  that 
saith,  I  know  him,  and  keepeth  not  his  commandments,  is  a  liar, 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  him.  But  whoso  keepeth  his  word,  in 
him  verily  is  the  love  of  God  perfected  ;  hereby  know  we  that 
we  are  in  him."  How  full  and  explicit  is  all  this,  and  that  both 
negatively  and  positively  !  He  that  keepeth  not  the  command- 
ments of  Christ  does  not  know  him,  and  can  have  no  evidence 
that  he  does.  And  on  the  other  hand,  he  who  does  keep  his 
commandments,  does  know,  and  has  evidence  that  he  knows,  and 
loves,  and  is  in  him. 

(2)  As  another  motive,  consider  that  unless  you  live  up  to 
your  profession,  you  will  deeply  dishonor  it.  This  is  the  way 
that  the  christian  profession  is  come  into  so  much  contempt  in 
the  eyes  of  the  world,  that  many  who  bear  the  christian  name  do 
not  live  up  to  their  profession.  If  they  would  but  do  this,  and 
if  all  christians  would  do  it,  that  profession  would  be  honorable 
in  the  esteem  even  of  a  sinful  world.  But  vfhen  so  many  profess 
one  thing,  and  do  and  practise  quite  the  reverse,  the  men  of  the 
world,  and  even  the  candid  and  honest  among  them,  are  stumbled 
and  confounded,  and  perhaps  led  to  doubt  the  reality  of  religion, 


HOLDING  FAST  OUR  PROFESSION.  301 

and  to  be  careless  as  to  seeking  it  for  themselves.  And  while 
this  is  the  sad  result  with  even  the  candid  and  honest,  the  pro- 
fane and  malicious  will  indulge  tiiemselves  in  open  ridicule  and 
contempt.  And  thus  Christ  and  his  holy  religion  are  reproached 
and  dishonored.  Beware  then,  my  brethren,  lest  by  living  un- 
worthily of  your  profession,  and  thus  "  breaking  the  law,"  you 
dishonor  God,  and  so  cause  "  his  name  and  doctrine  to  be  blas- 
phemed." "  It  must  needs  be  that  offences  come,  but  woe  to  that 
man  by  whom  the  offence  cometh."  Let  none,  then,  "  put  a 
stumbling  block,  or  an  occasion  to  fall,"  in  the  way  of  his  brother, 
or  of  those  without ;  but  let  your  conversation  be  such,  that  those 
who  would  otherwise  "  speak  against  you  as  evil  doers,"  seeing 
your  good  works,  may  be  led  to  "  glorify  God  in  the  day  of  vis- 
itation." Evermore,  "  watch  and  pray  that  you  enter  not  into 
temptation  ;"  that  you  may  "  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God  your 
Savior  in  all  things;"  that  "your  light  may  so  shine  before  men, 
that  they  may  see  your  good  works  and  glorify  your  father  who 
is  in  heaven."  Let  all  professors  do  this,  and  then  will  the  church 
look  forth  as  the  morning,  "  fair  as  the  moon,  clear  as  the  sun, 
and  terrible  as  an  army  with  banners." 


26* 


SERMON   XIX. 


THE  SOUL'S  IMMORTALITY,  AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.* 

2  Timothy  I  :  10. — Jfho  hath  aholished  death,  and  hath  brought  life  and  im- 
mortality to  light  through  the  gospel. 

This  Lecture  was  designed  not  only  to  exhibit  positive  argu- 
ments in  favor  of  Christianity,  but  to  refute  the  objections  and 
doctrines  of  infidelity.  In  a  controversy  like  this,  it  is  not  best  to 
be  always  on  the  defensive.  It  is  often  useful  to  act  on  the  of- 
fensive ;  to  make  attack  ;  and  like  Hannibal,  who  succeeded  best 
in  Italy,  to  carry  the  war  into  the  heart  of  the  enemy's  country. 

Deists  oppose  not  only  revelation  in  general,  but  the  several 
most  important  doctrines  of  it ;  particularly  the  doctrine  of  a  fu- 
ture state  of  rewards  and  punishments.  This  doctrine,  as  repre- 
sented in  the  scriptures,  is  one  main  cause  of  infidelity.  If  there 
be  a  future  state,  infidels  are  afraid  for  the  consequences.  They 
are  conscious  of  their  own  impiety  and  immorality,  or  at  least  of 
their  neglect  of  true  virtue  and  religion  ;  and  therefore  if  there  be 
a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  they  expect  that  pun- 
ishment will  be  their  portion.  The  prospect  of  this  is  dreadful  ; 
and  therefore  they  search  for  arguments  against  the  reality  of  such 
a  state.  They  see  clearly  that  such  a  state  is  taught  in  the  scrip- 
tures, and  therefore  they  reject  them,  and  console  themselves  in 
infidelity,  apprehending  that  there  is  no  evidence  of  a  future  state 
but  that  which  the  scriptures  afford.  It  will,  then,  be  advanta- 
geous to  the  cause  of  Christianity,  if  it  can  be  shown  that  the  in- 
fidel has  no  such  ground  of  consolation  ;  that  the  light  of  nature 
teaches  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments ;  and  that  no 
man  has  any  well-founded  motive  of  this  kind  to  reject  revela- 
tion. This  I  shall  endeavor  to  show,  by  offering  the  arguments 
which  the  light  of  nature  affords  in  favor  of  the  immortality 
of  the  soul,  and  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments. 

*  Preached  at  the  Lecture  instituted  by  the  General  Association,  on  the 
day  befoi'e  the  Commencement  at  Yale  College,  New  Haven,  Conn.  Sept. 
1795. 


THE  soul's  immortality.  303 

These  arguments  will  be  drawn,  1.  From  the  soul's  immateriality  ; 
and  2.  From  several  moral  considerations.     And, 

I,  The  soul  is  an  immaterial  substance,  and  therefore  natu- 
rally immortal.  ; — 

That  is,  it  is  not  capable  of  destruction  by  a  dissolution  of  its 
parts,  as  all  material  bodies  are.  I  acknowledge  that  this  con- 
sideration is  not  decisive  in  favor  of  the  real  and  actual  immor- 
tality of  the  soul.  Yet  all  opposers  of  its  immortality,  oppose 
also  its  immateriality,  and  thus  show  that  they  consider  its  imma- 
teriality as  an  obstacle  in  their  way  which  it  concerns  them  to  re- 
move. As  they  assert  the  soul  to  be  a  material  substance,  it 
seems  proper,  1.  To  consider  their  ideas  of  matter  and  of  the  soul ; 
2.  To  examine  their  arguments  to  disprove  the  soul's  immateriality  ; 
and  3.  To  show  by  positive  arguments  that  the  soul  is  immaterial. 

I.  I  shall  briefly  consider  their  ideas  of  matter,  and  of  the  hu- 
man soul.  It  is  not  strange  that  on  these  subjects  they  should 
differ  among  themselves  ;  and  it  is  not  worth  while  to  follow,  or 
even  to  relate  the  opinions  of  all  the  opposers  of  the  soul's  imma- 
teriality. It  will  be  sufficient,  if  I  consider  that,  which  in  modern 
times  is  the  most  noted,  and  perhaps  has  been  the  most  labored, 
and  supported  by  the  most  learned  arguments. 

Matter  is  defined  by  a  late  writer,  "  to  be  an  extended  substance 
possessed  of  certain  powers  of  attraction  and  repulsion  ;"*  and  it 
is  said,  "  take  away  attraction  and  repulsion  and  matter  vanishes," 
p.  245.  Solidity  and  impenetrability  is  denied  to  belong  to 
matter,  and  it  is  said  that  it  is  ''  a  compages  of  centres  of  attrac- 
tion and  repulsion."  Therefore  it  is  held  that  matter  thinks,  re- 
flects, reasons,  etc. ;  and  as  it  is  said  to  consist  of  mere  centres 
of  attraction  and  repulsion,  these  centres,  void  of  all  solidity, 
must  think,  and  reason,  etc.  Matter,  as  just  now  observed,  is 
said  to  be  an  extended  substance  ;  and  a  compact  body  is  de- 
fined to  be  a  compages  of  centres  of  attraction  and  repulsion. 
At  the  same  time,  however,  it  is  held  that  a  single  one  of  these 
centres  is  indivisible,  and  does  not  occupy  any  portion  of  space, 
p.  249,  etc.  If  so.  then  any  number  of  these  centres,  or  any  com- 
pages of  them,  can  occupy  no  space.  They  may,  indeed,  define 
or  mark  out  a  certain  portion  of  space.  But  this  portion,  defined 
by  these  centres  or  points,  is  no  more  a  substance  than  any  other 
part  of  space,  or  than  space  in  general.  How,  then,  can  matter 
he  called  an  extended  substance  1  It  is  said  that  matter  possesses 
certain  powers  of  attraction  and  repulsion.  Now  what  possesses 
these  powers  ?  Nothing  solid  or  extended  ;  but  an  unextended 
centre  or  mathematical  point,  or  at  most  a  compages  of  these 

*  Correspoudence  between  Price  and  Priesdy,  pp.  16  and  6. 


304  THE  soul's  immortality,  1 

points.  These  points  are  the  mere  centres,  to  and  from  which 
the  divine  agency  is  directed  in  what  this  scheme  calls  attraction 
and  repulsion.  For  it  is  allowed  that  attraction  and  repulsion 
are  no  actions  of  matter,  but  of  some  cause  extrinsic  to  it ;  that  is 
of  the  Deity.  It  is  expressly  asserted,  "  that  the  divine  Being 
and  his  energy  are  absolutely  necessary  to  that  of  every  other 
being;"  that  "everything  is  the  divine  power  ;"  (I  suppose  it  is 
meant,  is  the  effect  of  that  power)  that  "  all  action  is  the  action 
of  God;"  that  "he  does  everything;"  that  "his  power  is  the 
very  life  and  soul  of  everything  that  exists,  and  that  strictly 
speaking,  without  him  we  are  as  well  as  can  do  nothing,"  p.  253. 
The  whole  of  matter,  therefore,  according  to  this  scheme,  is  the 
divine  agency,  drawing  or  driving  certain  mathematical  points,  to 
or  from  certain  other  mathematical  points.  Now  if  this  matter 
thinks,  reasons,  loves  and  hates,  what  is  it  belonging  to  it  that 
does  these  things?  It  must  be  either  these  mathematical  points, 
or  the  divine  agency  exerted  in  attraction  and  repulsion.  But  it 
is  to  be  presumed  that  mere  mathematical  points  do  not  reason, 
think,  etc.  ;  because  on  that  supposition,  not  only  would  all 
matter  think,  which  is  not  pretended  ;  but  all  space,  and  every 
mathematical  point  in  the  universe  would  think.  Nor  is  it  con- 
ceived that  the  divine  agency  exerted  in  attraction  and  repulsion 
thinks,  or  is  the  subject  of  human  thought.  No  doubt  the  divine 
mind  thinks  in  all  its  actions  ;  but  it  is  not  pretended  that  the  di- 
vine mind  is  matter,  or  any  property  of  matter ;  and  we  are  in- 
quiring after  that  thought  of  which  matter  is  the  subject,  or  which 
is  put  forth  or  produced  by  matter.  If  the  divine  agency  which 
produces  attraction  and  repulsion,  produces  at  the  same  time 
thought  also,  then  as  attraction  and  repulsion  are  common  to  all 
matter,  it  will  follow  that  thought  is  common  to  all  matter.  But 
this  is  expressly  denied  by  the  scheme  on  which  I  am  remarking. 
The  doctrine  which  we  are  considering  is,  that  matter  thinks ; 
and  yet  it  is  denied  that  matter  of  itself,  either  attracts  or  repels, 
that  is,  moves  either  itself  or  any  other  matter.  But  is  it  not 
strange,  that  it  has  no  power  either  of  attraction  or  repulsion  ; 
but  that  all  attraction  and  repulsion,  and  therefore  all  motion  in 
all  matter,  should  be  the  effect  of  an  immediate  divine  agency, 
and  yet  that  matter  should  have  the  power,  without  that  imme- 
diate divine  agency,  to  think  and  reason,  to  choose  and  refuse, 
to  love  and  hate  ?  Surely  if  "  everything  be  the  divine  power," 
or  the  immediate  effect  of  it ;  if  "  the  Deity  do"  (or  immediately 
cause)  "  everything  ;"  if  "  his  power  be  the  very  life  and  soul  of 
everything  that  exists,  and  strictly  speaking  without  him  we  are, 
as  well  as  can  do  nothing  ;"  then,  according  to  these  concessions, 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  305 

thought  is  the  immediate  effect  of  the  divine  power.  As  an  act 
or  action  of  the  mind,  it  is  the  immediate  effect  of  God's  action. 
It  is  immediately  caused  by  God,  "  as  God's  power  is  the  hfe 
and  soul  of  everything  that  exists  ;"  and  our  soul  is  not  matter, 
(but  the  divine  power  is)  and  strictly  speaking,  without  him  and 
his  immediate  agency,  we  cannot  think. 

If  it  should  be  said,  that  we  can  think  without  his  immediate 
agency,  and  that  only  his  mediate  agency  is  necessary  to  our 
thinking  ;  then  I  ask,  what  is  the  medium  which  the  divine  agen- 
cy makes  use  of  to  the  production  of  thought  ?  Not  anything  in, 
or  belonging  to  matter,  surely  ;  for  that,'according  to  the  scheme 
now  under  consideration,  consists  of  nothing  but  attraction  and 
rej)ulsion  directed  to  and  from  certain  indivisible  centres  or 
mathematical  points.  It  will  not  be  pretended  that  these  points 
are  the  medium  ;  for  they  are  really  nothing  but  the  beginnings 
and  bounds  of  the  divine  agency  in  attraction  and  repulsion.  It 
will  not  be  pretended  that  attraction  or  repulsion  is  the  medium  ; 
for  they  are  nothing  but  the  immediate  divine  agency  ;  and  for 
the  divine  agency  to  produce  thought,  by  the  medium  of  the  di- 
vine agency,  is  absurd.  So  it  seems  that  all  this  cry  about  the 
materiality  of  the  soul,  and  matter's  thinking,  comes  to  this  mere- 
ly, that  God,  by  his  immediate  agency,  produces  thought  where 
lie  commonly  produces  certain  other  effects,  called  attraction  and 
repulsion,  or  motion  to  and  from  certain  points  or  centres.  And 
if  this  were  ever  so  true,  could  this,  with  any  propriety,  be  called 
matter's  thinking  ?  Or  could  it,  from  these  premises,  be  inferred 
that  the  human  soul  is  material  ? 

It  is  manifest,  however,  that  this  scheme  is  aimed  at  something 
further  than  this.  It  is  expressly  declared,  "  that  sensation  and 
thought  do  necessarily  result  from  the  organization  of  the  brain, 
when  the  powers  of  mere  life  are  given  to  the  system,"  p.  256. 
How  to  reconcile  this  with  what  was  just  now  quoted  from  the 
same  scheme,  that  everything  and  every  action  are  the  effect  of 
the  divine  agency,  and  this  as  has  just  been  shown,  an  immediate 
agency,  I  must  leave  others  to  inform  us.  Besides,  that  sen- 
sation and  thought  should  necessarily  result  from  the  organ- 
ization of  the  brain,  when  the  powers  of  mere  life  are  given  to 
the  system,  is  not  reconcilable  with  what  this  same  scheme  holds 
concerning  a  person  in  a  deep  sleep,  p.  271.  It  will  not  be  pre- 
tended but  that  the  brain  of  such  a  person  is  well  organized,  and 
the  person  himself  is  alive  ;  and  yet  it  is  asserted  that  the  soul  of 
such  a  man  ceases  to  think.  So  that  on  the  premises  of  this 
scheme,  thought  does  7iot  necessarily  or  always  result  from  the 
organization  of  the  brain,  when  life  is  once  given.     It  is  said,  that 


306  THE  soul's  immortality, 

*'  in  all  other  cases  we  deem  it  sufficient  to  say,  that  certain  cir- 
cumstances are  the  causes  and  the  necessary  causes  of  certain 
appearances,  if  tlie  appearances  always  accompany  the  circum- 
stances," p.  258.  But  the  appearances  of  thought  and  sensation 
do  not,  according  to  our  adversaries'  concessions,  always  accom- 
pany life,  and  the  organization  of  the  brain.  Therefore,  by  their 
own  concessions,  sensation  and  thought  do  not  necessarily  result 
from  the  organization  of  the  brain,  and  animal  life. 

It  is  said,  p.  256,  "  that  the  whole  man,"  (meaning  both  soul 
and  body)  "  is  of  the  same  uniform  composition  ;"  and  that  man 
"  is  a  homogeneous  substance."  But  of  what  substance  is  man 
compounded  ?  Matter,  it  is  said,  is  a  mere  compages  of  mathe- 
matical points,  the  centres  of  attraction  and  repulsion.  These 
points,  then,  are  no  substance  at  all.  Nor  are  attraction  and  re- 
pulsion substance.  Therefore  if  the  whole  man  be  compound- 
ed, or  consist  of  matter,  he  is  compounded  of  no  substance  at  all, 
and  is  no  substance,  either  homogeneous  or  heterogeneous.  Again 
we  are  told  "  that  substance  is  the  unknown  support  of  proper- 
ties," p.  364.  But  the  support  of  attraction  and  repulsion,  which 
are  acknowledged  to  be  divine  agencies,  must  be  the  Deity  him- 
self. Then  it  follows  that  the  substance  of  matter  is  God  him- 
self ;  that  the  Deity  is  a  material  being  or  substance  ;  and  if  the 
whole  man  consist  of  matter,  he  consists  of  the  divine  essence, 
and  the  Deity  is  the  to  TTan,  or  the  universe  !  Such  are  the  conse- 
quences to  which  this  scheme  of  the  materiality  of  the  human  soul 
necessarily  leads  us  ! 

2.  It  was  proposed  next  to  consider  more  directly  some  of  the 
arguments  by  which  it  is  attempted  to  be  proved  that  the  soul  is 
material.     These  are  principally  the  following  : 

(1)  That  reason  and  thought  depend  on  the  brain,  because  a 
person  can  exercise  thought  and  reason  as  long  as  his  brain  is  in 
a  state  of  soundness,  but  never  after  it  is  destroyed.  On  this  I 
observe,  1.  That  if  it  were  ever  so  true  that  thought  depends  on 
the  brain,  still  it  may  be  the  act  of  an  immaterial  substance.  It 
will  not  be  pretended  that  everything  on  which  the  exercise  of 
thought  and  reason  depends,  is  the  soul.  If  it  were  so,  we  should 
prove  that  the  trunk  of  the  body,  the  heart,  the  lungs,  the  neck, 
etc.,  are  the  soul,  because  thought  and  reason,  in  our  present 
state,  depend  on  every  one  of  these.  2.  It  is  not  true  that  a 
man  can  exercise  thought  and  reason  as  long  as  his  brain  is  in  a 
state  of  soundness,  if,  as  is  held  by  the  advocates  for  the  materi- 
ality of  the  soul,  he  ceases  to  think  in  a  deep  sleep,  or  in  a  swoon. 
3.  As  to  the  observation  that  thought  ceases  when  the  brain  is 
destroyed,  this  no  more  proves  the  brain  to  be  the  soul,  than  the 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  307 

same  argument  would  prove  the  trunk  of  the  body,  or  any  of  its 
several  vital  parts  to  be  the  soul. 

(2)  Another  argument  to  prove  that  the  human  soul  is  mate- 
rial, is,  that  the  souls  of  brutes  are  material ;  and  they  appear  to 
be  analogous  to  human  souls.  But  it  is  not  granted  that  the  souls 
of  brutes  are  material.  The  argument  to  prove  that  they  are  so, 
is,  that  they  cease,  or  are  annihilated  at  death.  But  in  reply  to 
this  T  would  observe,  that  if  they  are  annihilated  at  death,  this 
does  not  prove  that  they  are  material.  God  may  annihilate  a 
s})irit  as  well  as  matter,  or  as  well  as  he  can  make  it.  But  that 
they  are  annihilated  is  not  an  agreed  point,  among  either  philos- 
ophers or  diviues. 

(3)  Another  argument  for  the  materiality  of  the  soul,  is,  that 
it  appears  to  grow  and  decay  with  the  body  ;  that  when  the  body 
is  in  its  infancy,  the  powers  of  the  soul  are,  in  correspondence 
to  those  of  the  body,  feeble  and  imperfect ;  that  as  the  body 
grows,  they  increase  in  strength,  and  as  the  body  decays,  tliey 
decay  with  it.  The  answer  is,  that  all  this  may  be  consistently 
enough  with  the  supposition  of  the  immateriality  of  the  soul.  The 
connection  between  the  body  and  the  soul  may  be  such  as  to  pro- 
duce these  effects.  Therefore  they  are  no  proof  for,  or  against 
the  immateriality  of  the  soul.  These  are  some  of  the  principal 
arguments  urged  to  prove  that  the  soul  is  matter.  The  force  of 
them  I  submit  to  the  judgment  of  this  learned  audience. 

Still  it  may  be  said  that  though  thought  is  the  immediate  effect 
of  the  divine  agency,  and  does  not  necessarily  result  from  the  or- 
ganization of  the  brain  and  from  animal  life,  yet  God  always  pro- 
duces thought  in  an  organized  brain,  and  never  without  it,  just  as 
he  produces  gravitation  in  all  matter,  and  never  without  it;  that 
thought  is  as  much  a  property  or  effect  of  matter,  as  gravitation 
is  ;  that  this  is  sufficient  to  answer  every  purpose  wished  for  by 
the  advocates  for  the  materiality  of  the  soul ;  and  that  on  this 
plan,  we  shall  have  thought  as  long  as  we  have  an  organized  brain 
and  no  longer.  But  to  all  this  I  answer,  1.  That  it  is  not  true 
on  the  principles  of  the  materialists  themselves,  that  we  have 
thought  as  long  as  we  have  an  organized  brain  ;  for  they  hold  that 
in  a  deep  sleep  and  in  a  swoon,  thought  ceases.  Yet  in  these 
cases,  and  especially  in  a  deep  sleep,  it  will  not  be  pretended  that 
the  brain  is  disorganized.  2.  To  say  that  we  never  are  the  sub- 
jects of  thought,  any  longer  than  the  brain  remains  entire  and 
properly  organized,  is  to  suppose  that  the  soul  dies  with  the  body  ; 
which  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  question.  I  sliall  now,  as  pro- 
posed, 

3.  Subjoin  some  positive  considerations  and  arguments  to  prove 


308  THE  soul's  immortality, 

that  the  human  soul  is  immaterial.  Here  let  us  first  consider  the 
only  sense  in  which  we  have  to  prove  that  the  soul  is  immaterial. 
This  is  the  sense  just  now  explained,  under  the  last  objection.  I 
mean  this,  that  it  is  not  true  that  when  the  human  body,  and  par- 
ticularly when  the  brain  is  destroyed  and  disorganized,  the  soul 
also  is  destroyed  and  ceases  to  think  ;  or  that  God  no  longer  con- 
tinues the  thinking  of  the  individual,  than  he  continues  his  body 
in  life,  and  his  brain  in  its  proper  organization.  For  as  to  the 
scheme  that  matter  thinks  by  its  own  power,  and  that  thought 
necessarily,  and  without  the  immediate  agency  of  the  Deity,  re- 
sults from  matter  however  organized  ;  either  it  is  expressly  given 
up  by  the  modern  advocates  for  the  materiality  of  the  soul,  or  it 
abundantly  contradicts  other  principles  which  they,  as  well  as 
other  philosophers,  expressly  hold.  This  I  conceive  clearly  ap- 
pears from  what  has  been  already  said  in  this  discourse.  It  is 
granted  by  our  opponents  that  everytliing  is  the  effect  of  the  di- 
vine power  ;  that  every  action  is  the  effect  of  God's  action  ;  and 
that  his  power  is  the  life  and  soul  of  everything  that  exists. 
Therefore  the  only  question  remaining  to  be  discussed  is,  that 
just  stated,  whether  thought  may  and  does  exist,  or  whether  God 
may  and  does  continue  human  thought  after  the  death  of  the 
body.     As  to  this  I  observe, 

(1)  That  God  may,  or  has  power  to  continue  thought  under 
these  circumstances,  seems  impossible  to  be  denied  by  any  one. 
It  is  granted  by  those  whom  I  now  oppose,  tliat  everything  and 
every  action  in  creation  are  the  immediate  effects  of  the  divine 
power  and  energy.  This  therefore  is  true  concerning  thought  in 
particular.  Thought,  then,  is  the  immediate  effect  of  the  divine 
power,  and  is  not  brought  into  existence  by  the  medium  of  mat- 
ter, or  anything  in  or  pertaining  to  it ;  neither  matter,  nor  any 
of  its  properties  help  at  all  towards  its  production.  Therefore  it 
is  just  as  easy  for  God  to  produce  it  without  matter,  as  in  con- 
nection with  it ;  and  of  course  he  may  continue  thought  after  the 
death  of  the  body.  This  is  plain  apart  from  all  that  is  said  in  the 
scriptures.  Some,  however,  who  oppose  the  immateriality  of  the 
soul,  profess  a  belief  in  the  scriptures.  With  them,  then,  it  is 
pertinent  to  argue  from  the  scriptures  ;  from  what  God,  who  is 
able  to  continue  the  thinking  principle  after  death,  has  assured 
us  he  will  do.     I  observe,  then, 

(2)  That  the  scriptures  aflford  us  light  in  this  case.  This  will 
appear  from  several  passages.  The  first  that  I  shall  adduce  is 
2  Cor.  12:  2 — 4,  "I  knew  a  man  in  Christ,  about  fourteen  years 
ago,  (whether  in  the  body,  I  cannot  tell ;  or  whether  out  of  the 
body,  I  cannot  tell :  God  knoweth  ;)  such  an  one  caught  up  to 


AND  FUTURE  UETKIBUTION.  309 

the  third  heaven.  And  I  knew  such  a  man,  (whether  in  the 
body,  or  out  of  the  body,  I  cannot  tell  ;  God  knoweth  ;)  how  he 
was  caught  up  into  paradise,  and  heard  unspeakable  words,  which 
it  is  not  lawful  for  a  man  to  utter."  Now  it  is  plain  that  this 
man  had  perception  and  tliought ;  for  he  was  conscious  that  he 
was  caught  up  to  the  third  heaven  and  to  paradise,  and  there  heard 
unspeakable  words.  But  the  apostle  did  not  know  whether  he 
was  in  the  body,  or  out  of  it.  Therefore  it  was  clearly  his  opin- 
ion that  a  man  might  be  conscious,  and  perceive,  and  think,  out 
of  the  body.  To  the  same  purpose  is  chapter  5:  6,  8,  9,  of  the 
same  epistle.  "  Therefore  we  are  always  confident,  knowing  that 
whilst  we  are  at  home  in  the  body,  we  are  absent  from  the  Lord. 
We  are  confident,  I  say,  and  willing  rather  to  be  absent  from  the 
body,  and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord.  Wherefore  we  labor, 
that  whether  present  or  absent,  we  may  be  accepted  of  him." 
These  words  inform  us  that  the  apostle  and  his  fellow  christians 
of  that  day,  were  willing  to  be  absent  from  the  body  and  present 
with  the  Lord  ;  and  that  they  made  it  the  great  object  of  their 
labor,  that  whether  present  or  absent  they  might  be  accepted  of 
him ;  which  clearly  shows  their  belief  that  they  might  be  absent 
from  the  body,  and  yet  consciously  present  with  the  Lord.  This 
text  also  further  informs  us,  that  they  were  confident  this  would 
be  the  case  with  them  ;  that  when  they  should  leave  the  body, 
it  would  be  to  go  and  be  present  with  the  Lord. 

Acts  7:  59,  "  And  they  stoned  Stephen,  calling  upon  God  and 
saying.  Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  spirit."  If  Stephen  had  be- 
lieved that  there  was  no  intermediate  or  separate  state,  he  would 
doubtless  have  expressed  himself  very  differently.  He  would 
have  said,  "  Lord  Jesus  receive  my  spirit  and  body,  or  my  body 
and  brain  at  the  general  resurrection."  Matt.  10:  28,  "  Fear  not 
them  which  kill  tiie  body,  but  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul ;  but 
rather  fear  him  which  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in 
hell."  What  can  be  plainer  than  that  these  words  imply  that 
the  soul  will  survive  the  body  ?  Nothing  can  be  more  manifest 
than  that  this  is  their  meaning,  unless  we  should  take  the  absurd 
sense  of  the  scheme  of  our  opponents,  that  we  are  to  fear  him 
who  is  able  to  destroy  both  brain  and  body  in  hell  !  Heb.  12: 
22,  23,  "  But  ye  are  come  to — the  spirits  of  just  men  made  per- 
fect." Lest  it  should  be  said  that  these  spirits  of  the  just  made 
perfect,  mean  the  saints  in  the  resurrection  state,  we  may  ob- 
serve, that  the  scriptures  have  explained  their  idea  of  spirits  very 
clearly.  John  4:  24,  "  God  is  a  spirit,  and  they  that  worship 
him,  must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  in  truth."  It  is  granted  on  all 
hands,  that  God  is  an  immaterial  being,  and  he  is  here  declared 

Vol.  II.  27 


310  THE  soul's  immortality, 

to  be  a  spirit.  By  "  a  spirit,"  therefore,  the  scriptures  mean  an 
immaterial  being.  Again,  Luke  24:  37,  39,  "  But  they  were  ter- 
rified and  affrighted,  and  supposed  they  had  seen  a  spirit.  And 
he  said  unto  them — behold  my  hands  and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I 
myself.  Handle  me,  and  see  ;  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and 
bones,  as  ye  see  me  have."  This  is  a  further  illustration  of  the 
scriptural  idea  of  a  spirit,  and  is  a  demonstration  that  that  idea  is 
not  reconcilable  with  the  doctrines  of  materialism. 

Another  text  bearing  on  the  main  question  before  us,  is  Acts 
1:  25,  "From  which  Judas  by  transgression  fell,  that  he  might 
go  to  his  own  place."  This  implies  that  Judas  was  in  a  state  of 
sensibility  after  the  death  of  his  body,  and  therefore  that  his  soul 
was  not  a  part  or  the  whole  of  his  body  which  at  death  becomes 
insensible.  If  it  should  be  said  that  his  own  place  meant  the 
grave,  the  answer  is  that  this  was  no  more  his  own  proper  place^ 
than  it  was  the  place  of  the  most  sincere  christian  ;  for  all,  both 
good  and  bad,  go  to  it.  2  Pet.  1:  13,  14,  "  Yea,  I  think  it  meet 
as  long  as  I  am  in  this  tabernacle,  to  stir  you  up  by  putting  you 
in  remembrance,  knowing  that  shortly  I  must  put  off  this  my 
tabernacle,  even  as  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  showed  me."  If 
the  soul  of  the  apostle  was  his  brain,  there  is  no  truth  in  this  re- 
presentation. His  brain  was  not  about  to  be  separated  from  the 
rest  of  his  body,  and  to  live  and  be  in  a  state  of  sensibility  after 
the  rest  of  his  body  was  dead  ;  but  his  brain  died  whenever  hi» 
body  died,  as  is  granted  by  those  who  hold  the  materiality  of  the 
soul.  Yet  the  apostle  declares,  that  he  knew  he  must  shortly 
put  off  this  tabernacle,  that  is,  be  separated  from  his  body,  and 
that  the  Lord  had  shown  it  to  him.  1  Thess,  5:  9,  10,  "  God 
hath  not  appointed  us  to  wrath,  but  to  obtain  salvation  by  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  died  for  us,  that  whether  we  wake  or 
sleep,  we  should  live  together  with  him."  I  need  not  inform  you^ 
that  the  expressions  "  waking  "  and  "  sleeping  "  are  very  com- 
monly used  in  the  scriptures  to  signify  bodily  life  and  death.  Nor 
does  it  appear  that  this  passage  will  bear  any  other  construction. 
If  it  will  not,  it  is  a  clear  and  direct  declaration,  that  whether  the 
bodies  of  true  christians  after  death  be  alive  or  dead,  their  souls 
shall  be  alive  and  with  Christ. 

Phil.  1:  21 — 23,  "  For  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain. 
But  if  I  live  in  the  flesh,  this  is  the  fruit  of  my  labor  ;  yet  what  I 
shall  choose,  I  wot  not.  For  I  am  in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  having 
a  desire  to  depart  and  to  be  with  Christ,  which  is  far  better." 
For  the  apostle  to  die,  could  be  gain  on  no  other  ground,  than 
this  was  to  be  in  a  state  of  sensibility  and  happiness  immediately 
after  death.     On  the  supposition  that  his  soul  died  with  his  body- 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  311 

and  was  to  be  revived  with  it  at  the  resurrection,  what  gain  could 
he  secure  by  dying  at  that  time,  more  than  if  he  should  have  lived 
many  years  longer  ?     In  either  case,  he  would,  by  the  promises, 
be  entitled  to  eternal  glory  in  the  resurrection  state.     By  dying 
at  the  time  he  wrote,  he  would  lose  all  that  happiness  which  he 
might  enjoy  in  spiritual  exercises,  in  communion  with  God  and 
with  Christ,  in  being  the  instrument  of  the  conversion  of  sinners, 
and  the  edification  of  saints,  in  building  up  the  kingdom  of  Christ 
in  the  world,  and  in  any  temporal  blessings,  improved  by  divine 
grace.     Therefore,  if  he  liad  died  at  that  time,  he  would  have 
been  a  loser  instead  of  a  gainer.     Nor  is  this  all.     By  continuing 
in  life,  he  would  have  made  further  proficiency  in  the  chiistiau 
course,  and  done  more  for  the  honor  of  God  and  the  kingdom  of 
Christ,  and  therefore  would  have  been  entitled,  by  promise,  to  a 
greater  degree  of  happiness  in  the  resurrection  state  ;  and  his 
happiness,  in  that  state,  would  have  been  the  greater  to  all  eter- 
nity.    So  that  in  reality  the  apostle  would  have  been  an  infinite 
loser  by  death  at  that  time.     He  would  have  left  a  certain  degree 
of  happiness,  possibly  equal  in  degree  to  the  whole  heavenly  hap- 
piness of  some  saints.     And  this  degree  of  happiness  running  on 
through  eternity,  would  be  a  sum  of  happiness  as  truly  infinite, 
as  the  whole  eternal  happiness  of  some  real  saints.     As,  there- 
fore, these  saints,  by  the  loss  of  their  whole  heavenly  happiness, 
would  sustain  an  infinite  loss,  so  would  the  apostle,  if  he  had  lost 
that  additional  degree  of  happiness,  to  which  he  would  have  been 
entitled  by  his  continued  life  and  usefulness.     Thus  we  can  make 
nothing  of  this  text,  but  upon  the  supposition  that  his  soul  did 
not  die  with  his  body,  as  it  must  have  done,  if  it  was  his  brain, 
or  any  part  of  his  physical  system. 

1  Pet.  3:  19,  20,  "  By  which  also  he  went  and  preached  unto 
the  spirits  in  prison  ;  which  sometime  were  disobedient,  when 
once  the  long  suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while 
the  ark  was  preparing."  Now  unless  we  allow  the  soul  to  exist 
after  the  death  of  the  body,  in  what  sense  could  the  spirits  of  the 
survivors  of  the  old  world,  he  said  to  be  in  prison  ?  Their  spirits 
could  no  more  be  in  prison  than  their  bodies.  Nor  could  they, 
on  that  supposition,  be  properly  called  spirits.  They  would 
have  been  called,  as  they  would  have  been,  bodies  wholly.  But 
the  scriptures  everywhere  represent  spirits  to  be  different  from 
bodies,  as  we  have  already  seen. 

Eccl.  12:  7,  "  Then  shall  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it 
w^as,  and  the  spirit  siuiU  return  unto  God  who  gave  it."  How 
can  this  be  reconciled  with  the  doctrine  that  the  soul  is  matter, 
and  dies  with  the  body  ?     If  it  be  matter,  it  is  dust  as  well  as 


312  THE  soul's  immortality, 

the  body,  and  therefore  must  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was."  But 
it  is  expressly  said  that  while  the  dust,  or  the  body  returns  to  the 
earth,  the  spirit  returns  unto  God  ;  and  therefore  tlie  latter  must 
exist  in  a  state  of  separation  from  the  former.  Besides,  the  soul 
is  called  the  spirit,  which  always  in  scripture  is  distinguished,  as 
it  is  in  this  very  passage,  from  the  body,  or  the  dust.  Therefore 
we  have  a  right  to  believe  it  to  be  distinct.  If,  as  is  pretended, 
the  human  soul  is  the  brain,  then  it  seems  that  the  brain  is  not 
dust,  as  the  rest  of  the  body  is ;  which  it  is  presumed  our  adver- 
saries in  this  cause  will  not  pretend.  Let  us  read  this  text,  with 
the  word  brain  instead  of  spirit,  which  it  is  certainly  right  and 
proper  to  do,  if  the  spirit  be  the  brain  ;  and  then  it  will  run  thus  : 
"  The  dust  shall  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was,  and  the  brain  shall 
return  unto  God  who  gave  it !"  The  bare  repetition  of  the  pas- 
sage in  this  form,  shows  the  absurdity  of  such  a  construction, 
and  of  the  doctrine  which  could  lead  to  it. 

Luke  23:  43,  "  And  Jesus  said  unto  him,  Verily  I  say  unto 
thee,  to-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise."  This  could 
not  be  true,  if  the  soul  of  this  thief  on  the  cross  was  material, 
and  died  with  his  body.  If  it  should  be  said  that  the  meaning 
is,  that  as  the  thief  would  be  conscious  of  nothing  between  death 
and  the  resurrection,  his  being  with  Christ,  in  the  resurrection 
state,  would  seem  to  him  to  be  on  the  same  day  and  immediate- 
ly ;  I  answer  :  This  would  be  to  talk  unintelligibly,  without  rea- 
son and  without  example.  Would  it  not  be  unintelligible  and 
unreasonable  to  tell  a  man  who  had  been  the  whole  day  in  a 
deep  sleep,  and  who  was  wholly  ignorant  of  the  time  that  had 
passed  during  his  sleep,  that  it  was  but  an  hour  or  a  moment 
since  he  had  fallen  into  sleep  ?  Or  would  there  be  any  propriety 
or  truth  in  saying,  that  Lazarus,  who  lay  dead  four  days,  was 
raised  on  the  same  day,  and  even  immediately  after  his  death  ? 
Yet  this  would  have  been  just  as  true  and  proper,  on  the  ground 
of  this  objection  as  our  Lord's  telling  the  thief  on  the  cross,  "  To- 
day shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  paradise." 

Luke  16:  22,  23,  "  And  it  came  to  pass  that  the  beggar  died, 
and  was  carried  by  angels  into  Abraham's  bosom.  The  rich  man 
also  died,  and  was  buried  ;  and  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes  be- 
ing in  torments,"  etc.  This  parable  is  a  plain  representation  that 
Abraham  and  Lazarus  and  the  rich  man,  were  all  in  a  state  of 
existence  and  sensibility  between  death  and  the  resurrection,  and 
while  the  brethren  of  this  rich  man  were  still  in  this  life.  There- 
fore their  souls  were  not  material,  and  did  not  die  with  their  bo- 
dies. I  know  it  is  said,  that  this  is  a  parabolical  representation. 
I    grant    it.     But   parabolical   representations  are   designed    to 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  313 

teach  truth  and  not  falsehood.  Now  unless  this  parable  does 
teacii  direct  falsehood,  the  souls  of  Abraham,  Lazarus  and  the 
rich  man,  were  in  existence  and  sensibility,  in  a  state  of  separa- 
tion from  their  bodies  ;  and  by  parity  of  reasoning,  this  is  true 
of  all  mankind. 

Several  representations  in  the  book  of  the  Revelation,  teach  us 
that  the  dead,  and  especially  the  dead  saints  are  in  a  state  of  sen- 
sibility between  death  and  the  resurrection.  Ciiap.  5:  9,  10, 
"  And  they  sang  a  new  song,  saying.  Thou  art  worthy  to  take 
the  book,  and  to  open  the  seals  thereof;  for  thou  wast  slain,  and 
hast  redeemed  us  to  God  by  thy  blood,  out  of  every  kindred  and 
tongue  and  people  and  nation  ;  and  hast  made  us  unto  our  God 
kings  and  priests,  and  we  shall  reign  on  the  earth."  The  per- 
sons here  speaking  were  saints  redeemed  from  among  men.  The 
place  in  wjiich  they  were  seen  and  heard  by  the  apostle  to  sing 
this  song,  was  heaven,  as  is  manifest  by  the  preceding  context, 
and  by  other  passages.  And  the  time  was  manifestly  before  the 
resurrection,  because  it  is  said,  "  We  shall  reign  on  the  earth  ;" 
and  these  words,  whether  we  believe  the  reign  of  the  saints  on 
earth  to  be  immediately  before  or  after  the  resurrection,  prove 
that  the  time  at  which  they  were  spoken  was  before  it.  It  is  al- 
so manifest,  from  the  text  with  its  context,  that  the  time  of  sing- 
ing this  song,  was  at  the  time  of  the  Lamb's  taking  the  book 
sealed  with  the  seals,  and  previous  to  the  opening  of  them,  that 
is,  previous  to' the  great  events  and  dispensations  of  providence 
concerning  the  christian  church. 

Rev.  6:  9,  10,  "  And  when  he  had  opened  the  fifth  seal,  I  saw 
under  the  altar  the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain  for  the  word  of 
God,  and  for  the  testimony  which  they  held.  And  they  cried 
with  a  loud  voice,  saying.  How  long,  O  Lord,  holy  and  true,  dost 
thou  not  judge  and  avenge  our  blood  on  them  that  dwell  on  the 
earth?"  On  these  words  we  may  observe,  that  the  apostle  here 
had  a  vision  of  the  souls  of  the  martyred  saints,  pleading  for  ven- 
geance. But  on  the  supposition  that  the  souls  of  men  are  a  part 
of  their  bodies,  and  die  and  perish  with  them,  their  souls  could 
no  more  plead  for  vengeance  than  any  other  part  of  their  bodies  ; 
their  brain  no  more  their  hands  or  their  feet.  Again,  on  the 
supposition  that  the  souls  of  men  are  their  brains,  in  strict  pro- 
priety it  ought  to  have  been  said  ;  And  I  saw  under  the  altar  the 
bi'ciins  of  them  that  were  slain,  etc.  And  if  the  brain  be  the  soul, 
how  has  it  come  to  pass  that  the  scriptures,  neitiier  here  nor  in 
any  other  passage,  call  the  soul  by  its  literal  and  proper  name, 
but  always  speak  of  it  by  a  figurative  and  improper  one  ? 

Rev.  7:  13 — 15,  "  And  one  of  the  elders  answered,  saying  un- 
27* 


314  THE  soul's  immortality, 

to  me,  What  are  these  which  are  arrayed  in  white  robes,  and 
whence  came  they  ?  And  I  said  unto  him,  Sir,  thou  knowest. 
And  he  said  unto  me.  These  are  they  which  came  out  of  great 
tribulation,  and  have  washed  their  robes,  and  made  them  white 
in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb.  Therefore  they  are  before  the  throne 
of  God  and  serve  him  day  and  night  in  his  temple."  That  this  is 
a  representation  of  what  was  to  take  place  before  the  resurrection, 
is  manifest  from  this,  that  it  was  under  the  sixth  seal,  and  before 
the  opening  of  the  seventh  ;  and  that  the  events  of  the  seventh 
will  be  accomplished  before  the  resurrection.  But  in  this  scene 
taking  place,  thus  before  the  resurrection,  the  inspired  apostle  saw 
those  who  had  come  out  of  great  tribulation,  and  who  had  washed 
their  robes  and  made  them  white  in  the  blood  of  the  lamb,  standing 
before  the  throne  of  God,  and  serving  him  day  and  night  in  his 
temple.  And  this  most  plainly  implies  both  existence  and  sensi- 
bility. And  so  in  chap.  14:  13,  "  And  I  heard  a  voice  from 
heaven,  saying  unto  me.  Write,  Blessed  are  the  dead  that  die 
in  the  Lord,  from  henceforth  :  yea,  saith  the  Spirit,  that  they  may 
rest  from  their  labors,  and  their  works  do  follow  them."  These 
blessed  persons  were  the  dead,  and  not  those  who  are  raised  from 
the  dead  ;  for  these  last  are  spoken  of  as  alive.  And  they,  dead 
as  they  are,  are  said  to  rest  from  their  labors,  and  their  works  to 
follow  them  ;  that  is,  the  effects  of  their  works  follow  them,  in 
that  they  receive  the  reward  of  them.  But  this  could  not  be  tru- 
ly said  of  them,  if  they  were  in  a  state  of  insensibility,  and  were 
dead  both  as  to  soul  and  body.  Several  other  passages  in  this 
book,  seem  to  hold  forth  the  same  important  truth ;  but  these 
may  be  sufficient  for  our  argument. 

Thus  far  I  have,  so  far  as  relates  to  infidels,  argued  the  immor- 
tality of  the  soul  and  a  future  state  of  existence,  from  the  soul's 
immateriality.     I  now  proceed,  as  proposed, 

IL  To  argue  the  same  thing  from  several  moral  consid- 
erations. 

1.  Unless  there  were  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punish- 
ments, it  would  not  appear  that  God  is  a  holy  God,  a  friend  to 
virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice.  God  can  by  no  other  means  clearly 
appear  to  be  a  friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice,  than  by 
acting  the  part  of  a  friend  to  the  former,  and  an  enemy  to  the 
latter  ;  or  by  discovering,  in  his  treatment  of  the  virtuous  and  the 
vicious,  an  approbation  of  the  former  and  a  disapprobation  of  the 
latter.  But  he  is  a  friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice.  This 
is  granted  by  infidels  themselves.  Therefore  he  will  show  this 
character,  and  will  on  the  whole  appear  as  he  really  is.  There- 
fore he  will  treat  both  the  virtuous  and  the  vicious  so  as  to  show 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  315 

his  approbation  of  the  former,  and  his  disapprobation  of  the  lat- 
ter. And  such  treatment  as  this,  is  rewarding  and  punisliing; 
it  is  to  befriend,  uphold,  protect  and  reward  the  virtuous,  and  to 
punish  the  wicked.  If  God  should  not  thus  show  his  approba- 
tion of  virtue,  and  disapprobation  of  vice,  he  would  not  a[)pear 
in  his  true  character;  he  would  not  finally  appear  to  be  such 
a  being  as  he  really  is.  And  this  his  final  neglect  to  act  out  his 
real  character  in  the  view  of  his  intelligent  creatures,  would  be 
unaccountable,  and  irreconcilable  with  his  character  or  nature  it- 
self. But  he  does  not,  in  this  life,  thus  act  out  his  character  ;  and 
therefore  we  infer  that  there  will  be  a  future  state,  in  which  he 
will  act  it  out.  To  this  reasoning,  however,  several  objections  are 
made  which  require  an  answer. 

(1)  It  is  objected  that  we  do  not  know  but  that  virtue  is  pro- 
perly and  fully  rewarded  in  this  life  ;  that  many  whom  we  judge 
to  be  happy  are  miserable  ;  that  perhaps  those  vicious  men  whom 
we  judge  to  be  most  happy  are  extremely  miserable,  and  those 
virtuous  men  whom  we  judge  to  be  miserable  are  happy  ;  and 
that  thus  tiie  former  are  properly  punished,  and  the  latter  fully 
rewarded.  To  this  I  answer  :  This  objection  supposes  that  it  is 
impossible  for  us  to  know  who  are  happy  and  who  are  miserable. 
If  so,  it  is  impossible  that  God  should  ever  so  reward  the  virtu- 
ous and  punish  the  vicious  that  mankind  shall  know  it ;  it  is  im- 
possible that  he  should  ever  do  it  visibly  and  convincingly  to 
mankind.  If  so,  God  cannot  manifest  himself  to  mankind  as  a 
friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice  ;  for  they  can  see  his  true 
character  no  otherwise  than  by  seeing  him  reward  the  virtuous 
and  punish  the  wicked  ;  and  this  implies  that  they  see,  or  are 
convinced  of  the  happiness  which  he  communicates  to  the  former, 
and  of  the  misery  which  he  inflicts  on  the  latter.  If  it  were  in- 
deed true,  as  this  objection  implies,  that  we  cannot  know  by  ex- 
ternal appearances,  when  our  fellow-creatures  are  happy  and 
when  they  are  miserable,  then  we  cannot  know  that  they  are 
either  happy  or  miserable  in  a  future  state.  And  though  in  the 
state  of  the  damned,  they  should  appear  to  be  exquisitely  tor- 
mented, they  might  in  reality,  be  superlatively  happy.  So  that 
on  the  ground  of  this  objection  there  would  be  no  foundation  for 
complaining,  or  for  being  at  all  terrified  in  the  prospect  of  hell, 
and  all  the  apparent  torments  of  that  world  of  suffering.  If  it 
should  be  said  that  the  scriptures  assure  us  that  some  are  miser- 
able in  hell,  so  they  assure  us  that  some  are  miserable  in  this  life  ; 
that  those  who  are  finally  saved  will  have  come  out  of  great  trib- 
ulation, and  that  the  best  of  ciiristians  shall  on  earth  be  more  or 
less  subject  to  trial.     On  the  ground  of  this  objection,  though  the 


316  THE  soul's  immortality, 

virtuous  and  vicious  are  really  rewarded  and  punished  in  this  life, 
yet  neither  rewards  nor  punishments  are  visible.  But  the  honor 
of  God  and  the  vindication  of  his  character  as  a  friend  to  virtue 
and  an  enemy  to  vice,  require  that  sooner  or  later  they  be  visibly 
rewarded  and  punished,  so  that  men  in  general  shall  see  and 
know  it.  What  should  we  think,  and  what  should  we  have  a 
right  to  think  of  the  Deity,  if  he  always  appeared  to  treat  the  vir- 
tuous and  the  vicious  in  the  same  manner,  or  without  any  proper 
discrimination  ?  If  God  do  really  and  properly  distribute  re- 
wards and  punishments  in  this  life,  why  does  he  conceal  this  pro- 
ceeding, when  the  vindication  of  his  own  character,  and  the  re- 
lief of  his  most  dutiful  children  from  their  anxiety  for  his  honor, 
require  that  it  should  not  be  concealed,  but  openly  manifested? 

(2)  Another  objection  to  the  foregoing  reasoning  is,  That  vir- 
tue is  its  own  reward,  and  naturally  and  necessarily  tends  to  hap- 
piness while  it  is  practised  ;  and  tiiat  vice,  in  the  same  manner, 
naturally  punishes  itself;  so  that  there  is  no  need  of  a  future 
state  of  rewards  and  punishments.  To  this  it  may  be  answered, 
that  so  far  as  virtue,  by  its  own  native  tendency  to  happiness, 
rewards  itself,  and  vice,  by  its  own  native  tendency  to  misery, 
punishes  itself,  God  does  not  reward  the  one  or  punish  the  other. 
For  this  same  reward  would  attend  virtue  if  God  were  an  enemy 
to  it,  provided  he  did  not  interpose  positively  to  prevent  the  na- 
tive effect  of  it ;  and  the  same  punishment  would  attend  vice,  even 
if  God  were  a  friend  to  that,  provided  he  did  not  prevent  the 
effect  of  it.  This  reward  of  virtue,  then,  is  no  token  of  his  ap- 
probation of  it ;  nor  is  this  punishment  of  vice  any  token  of  his 
disapprobation.  By  this  reward  and  this  punisimient,  we  should 
never  know  that  God  is  a  friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to  vice. 
Besides,  it  is  not  true  that  virtue  carries  its  own  full  reward  with 
it.  It  will  not  be  pretended  that  the  perfect  virtue  and  holiness 
of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  was  fully  rewarded  in  this  life.  And  so 
with  regard  to  the  virtue  of  Paul,  and  the  other  apostles,  and  the 
prophets  and  holy  men  of  old  in  other  ages  of  the  world. 

(3)  Another  objection  is,  that  if  there  be  a  future  state,  it  need 
not  be  an  immortal  state  ;  that  virtue  may  be  sufficiently  reward- 
ed, and  vice  sufficiendy  punished  in  a  limited  time.  So  that  if 
it  should  be  allowed  that  the  argument  from  the  unequal  distri- 
bution of  rewards  and  punishments  in  this  life,  proves  the  future 
existence  of  the  soul,  it  does  not  prove  its  immortality.  To  this 
it  is  answered,  that  of  what  the  proper  reward  of  virtue  is,  we 
may  be  very  inadequate  judges.  Whatever  the  reward  is,  it  is  a 
rev/ard  of  grace  and  not  of  debt,  because  the  virtue  of  the  best 
man  is  imperfect,  and  therefore  he,  on  the  footing  of  law  and  jus- 


AND  FUTURE  RETKIBUTION.  317 

ticG  deserves  no  rcwaid.  But  God  means  to  show  his  own  infi- 
nite grace  in  the  reward  of  an  imperfect  creature  ;  and  that  a  re- 
ward sufficient  for  this,  may  be  bestowed  in  a  hmited  time,  does 
not  appear.  That  a  reward  equal  and  superior  to  the  merit  of  the 
a'eature,  may  be  bestowed  in  a  limited  time  is  granted  ;  for,  in 
fact,  lie  has  no  merit  at  all.  But  that  a  reward  expressive  of  the 
infinite  grace  and  goodness  and  bounty  of  God  can  be  received 
and  enjoyed  by  a  finite  creature,  in  a  limited  time,  does  not  ap- 
pear ;  and  whether  it  do  not  appear  to  be  an  impossibility,  that 
such  a  reward  should,  in  such  a  time,  be  enjoyed  by  a  finite  crea- 
ture, I  submit  to  the  decision  of  any  person  of  candor  and  judgment. 
And  whether  the  punishment  expressive  of  the  divine  infinite  ab- 
liorrence  of  sin,  do  not  require  an  equal  time  as  that  which  is  ex- 
pressive of  the  infinite  love  and  goodness  of  God,  I  submit  to  the 
same  decision. 

If  there  be  indeed  a  future  state  of  reward  and  happiness  to 
the  righteous,  but  a  limited  one,  then  the  best  of  men  must  be 
rendered  miserable  by  the  prospect  that  their  happiness,  however 
entire  without  that  prospect,  must  come  to  an  end,  and  that  they 
themselves  must  cease  to  exist.  On  the  other  hand  the  worst  of 
men  must  be  greatly  comforted  by  the  prospect  that  their  misery, 
however  great,  will  also  come  to  an  end.  Besides,  what  end  can  be 
answered  by  the  annihilation  of  either  the  righteous  or  the  wicked, 
after  they  shall  have  been  fully  rewarded  and  punished  ?  What  if 
the  righteous  have  been  rewarded  sufficiently  to  show  God's  ap- 
probation of  their  virtue,  and  his  own  grace  and  goodness  ? 
Why  may  they  not  yet  be  permitted  to  exist,  and  enjoy  further 
good  ?  Would  not  the  same  infinite  goodness,  which  at  first 
gave  them  existence  and  afterwards  made  them  happy,  be  dis- 
posed still  to  permit  them  to  enjoy  the  same  existence  and  hap- 
piness ?  What  good  to  God  or  the  universe,  can  we  imagine 
would  result  from  their  annihilation  ?  On  the  other  hand,  what 
good  can  it  be  to  God  or  the  universe,  to  annihilate  those  who 
have,  by  their  own  sufferings,  satisfied  for  their  own  sins  ?  To 
annihilate  them,  must  be,  it  would  seem,  a  further  punishment  of 
them,  which,  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  must  be  an  unjust  pun- 
ishment, as  they  are  supposed  to  have  suffered  already,  all  that 
justice  requires.  And  these  considerations  are  worthy  of  notice 
on  the  supposition,  that  tj^e  virtuous  and  vicious  are  fully  reward- 
ed and  punished  in  this  life.  If  they  be  thus  rewarded,  why  should 
they  be  annihilated  at  death  ?  The  loss  of  existence,  and  of  all 
that  happiness  v/hich  they  might  enjoy  throughout  eternity,  is  cer- 
tainly a  very  great  evil.  Why  should  they  be  made  to  suffer  this 
evil  ?     The  virtuous  might  certainly  be  supposed  to  escape  this 


318  THE  soul's  immortality, 

evil  as  a  punishment,  on  the  same  ground  that  they  escaped  the 
punishment  which  the  wicked  are  supposed  to  have  suffered  in 
this  hfe.  And  the  wicked  having,  by  the  supposition,  suffered 
the  full  punishment  of  their  sins  in  this  life,  do  not  deserve  any 
further  punishment,  nor  can  they  consistently  with  justice,  be 
made  to  suffer  any  ;  and  to  suppose  annihilation  brought  on  them 
as  a  punishment,  would  be  to  impeach  the  divine  justice.  If  it 
should  be  said  that  annihilation  is  brought  on  both  the  righteous 
and  the  wicked,  not  as  a  punishment ;  I  answer,  still  it  must  be 
brought  on  them  for  some  good  end,  and  must  somehow  be  sub- 
servient to  the  general  good  ;  otherwise  we  shall  impeach  both  the 
wisdom  and  goodness  of  God.  And  it  is  incumbent  on  the  ad- 
vocates for  annihilation  to  point  out  some  good  end  to  be  ob- 
tained by  it,  and  some  end  subservient  to  the  divine  glory  and 
the  general  good.  Until  this  is  done,  we  have  no  reason  to  say 
— nay,  it  would  be  unreasonable  to  say — that  the  annihilation  of 
all  mankind  will  take  place  at  death,  or  at  any  future  period 
whatever. 

2.  Another  argument  for  a  future  state,  is,  that  without  such  a 
state  it  does  not  appear  that  the  world  was  made  for  any  very 
valuable  end.  As  the  Deity  is  possessed  of  infinite  perfection,  of 
infinite  wisdom  and  goodness,  doubtless  all  his  works  are  design- 
ed to  answer  some  most  valuable  and  important  end.  But  if 
there  be  not  a  future  state,  the  creation  of  this  world  and  of  the 
human  race,  does  not  appear  to  answer  any  such  end.  For  what 
end  shall  we  suppose  the  world  was  created  ?  For  the  happiness 
of  mankind  ?  This  is  certainly  very  imperfectly  obtained  in  the 
present  state.  If  then,  that  was  the  end  of  the  creation  of  the 
world  and  of  the  human  race,  why  is  not  the  race  made  perfectly 
happy,  or  at  least  as  happy  as  possible  ?  If  we  believe  that  the 
happiness  of  mankind  is  the  end  of  creation,  and  that  God  seeks 
this  end  in  a  lower  degree  than  it  may  be  obtained,  we  impeach 
his  goodness.  If  he  seek  this  end  in  as  high  a  degree  as  possi- 
ble, and  yet  obtain  it  to  a  lower  degree  than  is  possible,  this  sup- 
position impeaches  his  power  or  wisdom. 

Or  shall  we  suppose  tiiat  God  made  the  world  and  mankind, 
for  the  display  of  his  own  glory  ?  The  display  of  the  divine  glo- 
ry, is  the  display  of  infinite  power,  wisdom,  and  goodness.  And 
to  display  these  perfections,  is  to  produce  a  system  of  intelligent 
creatures,  to  the  highest  possible  degree  excellent  and  happy. 
But  it  is  manifest  that  mankind  are  not,  in  the  present  state,  to 
the  highest  possible  degree  excellent  and  happy.  It  is  in  vain  to 
say  that  if  God  had  chosen,  he  could  not  have  kept  out  at  least 
some  of  the  diseases,  pains,  mortifications,  disappointments  and 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  319 

Other  calamities  that  mankind  suffer  in  the  present  state.  To  say 
tliat  God  has  glorified  iiimself  in  the  creation  of  the  human  race, 
because  in  the  present  state  men  enjoy  more  happiness  tiian  they 
suffer  misery,  will  not  relieve  the  dilBculty.  In  the  first  place  it 
is  a  matter  of  great  dispute,  and  one  that  has  never  yet  been  set- 
tled, whether  the  happiness  of  mankind  in  their  present  state,  docs 
or  does  not  exceed  their  misery.  But  let  us  allow  for  the  pres- 
ent that  it  exceeds  it.  Still  why  is  any  misery  sent  upon  them 
which  it  was  in  the  power  of  the  Deity  to  prevent  ?  How  is 
this  consistent  with  the  infinite  goodness  of  God,  and  with  his 
aiming  at  the  happiness  of  mankind  in  their  creation,  or  at  the 
dis})lay  of  his  glory,  especially  of  his  infinite  goodness  ?  Is  it  a 
sufficient  vindication  of  the  goodness  of  a  father,  to  say  that  he 
does  his  children  good,  more  often  than  he  does  them  harm  ;  or 
of  any  man,  to  say  that  he  pays  his  debts,  or  bestows  his  charity 
more  often  than  he  robs  or  steals  ?  No  !  it  is  a  stain  on  the 
character  of  any  parent,  that  he  inflicts  pain  on  his  child,  in'any 
instance,  unless  it  be  necessary  to  a  more  important  good  ;  and 
on  the  character  of  any  man,  that  he  has  been  once  guilty  of  theft 
or  robbery.  How,  then,  can  we  vindicate  the  character  of  God, 
and  make  it  out  that  the  hapi)iness  of  mankind  was  the  end  of 
their  creation,  on  any  other  ground  than  that  the  evils  of  this  life 
are  to  be  overruled  for  good  to  them  in  a  future  state  ?  Or  how 
shall  we  make  it  out  that  these  evils  are  subservient  to  the  clear 
manifestation  of  the  divine  power,  wisdom  and  goodness,  unless 
this  is  made  manifest  in  a  future  state  ?  Or  if  it  be  said  that  the 
evils  of  this  life  are  not  to  be  overruled  to  the  good  of  mankind 
in  a  future  state,  because  there  is  no  such  state  ;  but  they  are  to 
be  overruled  to  the  good  of  some  other  order  or  orders  of  beings, 
and  so  to  the  good  of  the  whole  ;  this  is  to  admit  that  mankind 
may  be  made  to  suffer  evil  in  order  to  promote  the  general  good. 
If  so,  how  do  we,  or  can  we  know  but  that  they  are  to  suffer 
evil,  in  the  future  world,  for  the  same  end  ?  But  this  will  open 
a  door  by  which  to  introduce  the  doctrine  of  the  eternity  of  hell- 
torments,  which  it  is  presumed  the  advocates  of  the  mortality  of 
the  human  soul  would  be  very  unwilling  to  open.  For,  once  al- 
low that  mankind  were  made,  not  for  the  end  of  their  own  hap- 
piness, but  to  promote  the  happiness  of  others  by  their  sufferings, 
and  it  will  be  difficult,  if  not  impossible  to  prove  that  they  may 
not  promote  the  liappiness  of  others  by  their  endless  as  well  as  by 
their  temporary  sufferings. 

Nor  is  this  all.  It  is  further  to  be  observed  with  respect  to 
this  matter,  that  if  it  were  ever  so  true  that  men  were  made  not 
for  their  own  sakes,  but  for  some  higher  order  or  orders  of  beings, 


••«• 


320  THE  soul's  immortality, 

still  they  are  moral  agents,  capable  of  moral  government,  and  ac- 
tually do  practise  either  virtue  or  vice.  Therefore  God,  as  the 
supreme  moral  governor,  and  the  patron  of  virtue  and  opposer  of 
vice,  must  take  suitable  notice  of  the  conduct  of  these  moral  agents, 
and  must  reward  and  punish  them  according  to  their  respective 
characters.  So  that  the  plea  that  men  were  not  made  for  their 
own  happiness,  does  not  at  all  weaken  the  argument  from  the  mo- 
ral government  of  God  in  favor  of  a  future  state. 

3.  I  shall  mention  but  one  more  argument  for  a  future  state. 
It  is  this.  If  the  eternal  existence  and  happiness  of  mankind,  as 
a  race  of  beings,  be  more  subservient  to  the  general  happiness  of 
the  universe,  than  their  annihilation  at  death,  then  the  infinite 
goodness  of  God  will  doubtless  choose  and  secure  them  eternal 
existence  and  happiness.  Infinite  goodness  seeks  the  good  and 
happiness  of  intelligent  beings  in  general,  and  will  consent  to  the 
misery  or  annihilation  of  any,  on  no  other  condition  than  that 
their  misery  or  loss  is  necessary  to  the  greater  good  and  happi- 
ness of  the  whole.  Therefore  as  the  annihilation  of  all  man- 
kind at  death  implies  the  entire  loss  of  all  that  good  and  happi- 
ness which  they  do  enjoy  in  life,  and  might  enjoy  to  all  eternity, 
we  may  be  sure  that  infinite  goodness  and  a  God  of  infinite  good- 
ness would  never  consent  to  it,  unless  it  were  absolutely  necessa- 
ry to  the  greater  happiness  of  the  whole  system  of  intelligent  be- 
ings. But  their  annihilation  does  not  appear  to  be  necessary  or 
subservient  to  the  greater  good  of  the  system.  In  what  respect 
would  the  rest  of  the  system  be  rendered  more  happy  by  it  ?  It 
is,  I  confess,  impossible  for  me  to  conceive  but  that  the  rest  of 
the  system  might  be  just  as  happy,  though  mankind  should  eter- 
nally exist  and  be  happy,  as  they  would  be  if  mankind  were  anni- 
hilated. Nay,  as  benevolence  rejoices  in  the  happiness  of  others, 
and  is  rendered  more  happy  by  their  happiness,  and  as  all  inno- 
cent intelligences  are  entirely  benevolent,  therefore  we  may  safe- 
ly conclude,  that  unless  some  special  reason  be  assigned  to  show 
the  contrary,  that  all  innocent  and  well  disposed  intelligences 
will  be  rendered  more  happy  by  the  eternal  existence  and  happi- 
ness of  mankind  as  a  race  of  beings,  than  they  would  be  by  their 
annihilation  at  death  ;  and  therefore  that  the  infinitely  good  God 
will  secure  their  eternal  existence  and  happiness. 

If  it  should  be  said  that  this  argument  proves  the  final  happi- 
ness, as  well  as  existence  of  all  mankind  ;  I  observe  that  it  un- 
doubtedly does,  unless  we  have  evidence  that  the  exclusion  of 
some  of  them  from  happiness  is  required  by  the  greatest  happi- 
ness of  the  system,  or  by  the  divine  glory,  as  we  certainly  have  by 
divine  revelation  ;  and  if  we  had  the  same  evidence  that  the  an- 


AND  FUTURE  RETRIBUTION.  321 

hilalion  of  all  the  race  would  be  subservient  to  the  good  of  the 
intellectual  universe,  we  should  doubtless  have  reason  to  believe 
that  all  men  would  be  annihilated. 

I  have  thus  exhibited  what  appears  to  me  the  principal  evi- 
dence, from  the  light  of  nature,  of  a  future  state  of  existence,  and 
of  the  immortality  of  the  human  soul.  This  evidence  may  be 
briefly  summed  up  thus  :  The  soul  is  a  spirit,  an  immaterial  sub- 
stance, and  therefore  naturally  incorruptible,  immortal,  capable 
of  existence  and  thought,  and  according  to  abundant  scriptural 
declarations,  actually  enjoying  them  both,  when  the  body  is  dead. 
Man  is  a  rational  creature,  capable  of  virtue  and  vice,  and  actu- 
ally practising  either  the  one  or  the  other,  and  therefore  account- 
able to  God  ;  and  God,  as  a  friend  to  virtue  and  an  enemy  to 
vice  must  reward  the  former  and  punish  the  latter  ;  and  as  this 
is  not  done  in  this  life,  it  must  be  in  a  future  state.  The  human 
race,  no  doubt,  were  made  for  some  important  end,  either 
their  own  happiness  or  the  divine  glory.  But  neither  of  these 
ends  appears  to  be  in  this  life  obtained  in  a  degree  at  all  corres- 
pondent to  the  divine  goodness,  power,  and  wisdom.  Therefore 
there  is  a  future  state  in  which  one  or  the  other,  or  both  will  be 
properly  obtained.  And  lastly,  we  have  reason  from  the  good- 
ness of  God  to  suppose  that  mankind  will  exist  in  a  future  state 
and  there  be  happy,  (since  goodness  and  especially  infinite  good- 
ness delights  in  the  existence  and  happiness  of  intelligent  beings), 
unless  their  existence  or  happiness  be  inconsistent  with  the  great- 
er happiness  of  some  other  being  or  beings  ;  and  there  is  no  reason 
to  believe  that  the  existence  of  all  men,  and  the  happiness  of  the 
virtuous  in  a  future  state,  are  at  all  inconsistent  with  the  happiness 
of  any  other  being  or  beings. 

I  grant  that  all  this  depends  on  the  moral  perfections  of  God. 
But  these  are  generally  granted  by  deists.  And  if  God  be  not  a 
friend  to  virtue,  he  will  not  be  disposed  to  reward  it  or  to  punish 
vice  ;  but  on  the  other  hand  he  may  be  disposed  eternally  to  pun- 
ish virtue  and  reward  vice,  or  he  may  be  disposed  to  punish  both 
alike.  He  may  be  disposed  to  give  all  men  a  future  existence, 
to  gratify  his  own  malevolence  in  their  endless  misery.  So  that 
the  advocates  of  annihilation  will  obtain  no  advantage  to  their 
cause  by  the  denial  of  God's  moral  perfections. 

Such  is  a  brief  summary  of  the  evidence  of  the  soul's  immor- 
tality and  of  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments.  The  in- 
ferences which  might  naturally  be  drawn  from  this  important  sub- 
ject are  many  and  of  much  moment.  But  as  this  discourse  has 
already  been  so  protracted,  I  shall  only  glance  at  two. 

1.  If  there  be  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  and 

Vol.  II.  28 


323  THE  soul's  immortality,  etc. 

this  be  evident  even  from  the  light  of  nature,  then  let  not  infidels 
deceive  themselves  in  reference  to  this  subject.  Let  them  not 
flatter  themselves  that  they  are  never  to  be  called  to  an  account  for 
their  conduct,  but  are  to  be  like  the  beasts  that  perish.  Let  them 
not  foolishly  say,  "  Let  us  eat  and  drink,  for  tomorrow  we  die." 
Let  them  not  fondly  embrace  infidelity,  with  the  idea  that  it  rea- 
sonably relieves  them  from  all  fear  of  a  future  state,  and  of  the 
punishment  to  be  inflicted  in  it.  That  state  is  a  reality.  They 
are  to  exist  forever.  And  if  unreconciled  to  God  through  Christ, 
his  wrath  must  be  their  only  portion. 

2.  Since  there  is  a  future  state,  how  diligent  ought  christians 
to  be,  to  live  in  a  manner  corresponding  to  their  hopes.  "  See- 
ing that  all  these  things  shall  be  dissolved,  what  manner  of  per- 
sons ought  ye  to  be  in  all  holy  conversation  and  godliness  ;  look- 
ing for,  and  hasting  unto  the  coming  of  the  day  of  God,  wherein  the 
heavens,  being  on  fire,  shall  be  dissolved,  and  the  elements  shall 
melt  with  fervent  heat  ?  Nevertheless,  we  according  to  his  prom- 
ise, look  for  new  heavens  and  a  new  earth,^  wherein  dwelleth 
righteousness.  »  Wherefore,  beloved,  seeing  that  ye  look  for  such 
things,  be  diligent  that  ye  may  be  found  of  him  in  peace,  without 
spot  and  blameless."  And  "  now  unto  the  king  eternal,  immor- 
tal, invisible,  the  only  wise  God,  be  honor  and  glory  forever  and 
ever.     Amen." 


SERMON   XX. 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.* 

Isaiah  28 :  ]  7. — .^tid  the  hail  shatl  sweep  away  the  refuge  of  lies,  and  the  waters 
shall  overfotv  the  hiding-place. 

It  is  supposed  that  our  text,  with  the  context,  had  a  primary 
reference  to  the  poHtical  state  of  the  Jews  at  the  time  when  it 
was  written.  They  were  at  that  time  threatened  by  the  Assyri- 
ans and  Chaldeans ;  and  to  secure  themselves  from  immediate 
danger  they  made  a  feigned  submission  to  their  invading  foes. 
To  this  it  is  supposed  the  prophet  refers  in  the  fifteenth  verse. 
"  We  have  made  a  covenant  with  death,  and  with  hell  are  we  at 
an  agreement ;  when  the  overflowing  scourge  shall  pass  through, 
it  shall  not  come  unto  us,  for  we  have  made  lies  our  refuge  and 
under  falsehood  have  we  hid  ourselves."  By  making  a  pretend- 
ed submission,  and  entering  into  a  treaty  of  peace  with  their  ene- 
mies, which  they  themselves  intended  to  break,  they  made  lies 
their  refuge,  and  hid  themselves  from  impending  danger  under 
falsehood.  And  by  this  deceitful  transaction  they  imagined  them- 
selves to  be  as  safe  from  death  and  slaughter,  as  if  they  had  made 
a  covenant  with  death,  and  an  agreement  with  hell  or  the  grave. 
And  though  the  overflowing  scourge  of  the  Assyrians  and  Chal- 
deans should  pass  through  all  the  adjacent  countries,  they  flat- 
tered themselves  that  it  should  not  come  unto  them. 

Others,  however,  suppose  that  the  covenant  with  death,  and 
the  agreement  with  hell,  refer  to  an  alliance  which  the  Jews  had 
entered  into  with  Egypt.  The  Egyptians  were  a  very  powerful 
nation,  and  the  Jews  certainly  did,  about  this  time,  form  an  alli- 
ance with  them  for  their  defence  against  the  Assyrians  or  Chal- 
deans. In  consequence  of  this  alliance  they  supposed  themselves 
as  safe  from  their  enemies,  and  from  death  by  their  hands,  as  if 
they  were  in  alliance  with  death  and  the  grave.  At  the  same 
time  that  they  entered  into  this  covenant  with  Egypt,  they  might 
doubtless  have  made  many  false  pretensions  of  obedience  or 
friendship  for  the  Chaldeans.     This  they  might  deem  an  additional 

*  First  preached  in  1779. 


324  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

ground  of  safety  ;  so  that  they  would  account  themselves  entirely 
secure  from  the  overflowing  scourge  of  the  Chaldean  army,  both 
because  they  were  in  alliance  with  Egypt,  and  because  they  had 
made  lies  their  refuge. 

God,  however,  tells  them  that  in  all  their  confidence,  they 
should  be  terribly  disappointed.  He  tells  them  that  he  had  laid 
in  Zion  a  sure  and  safe  foundation  of  confidence  in  all  times  of 
danger,  and  that  every  one  that  should  seek  safety  in  that,  should 
never  seek  in  vain.  "  Behold,"  he  says,  "  I  lay  in  Zion  for  a 
foundation,  a  stone,  a  tried  stone,  a  precious  corner  stone,  a  sure 
foundation.  He  that  believeth  shall  not  make  haste."  At  the 
same  time  he  informs  them  that  he  will  execute  strict  judgment 
on  all  who  do  not  trust  in  this  foundation  ;  and  that  their  perjured 
submission  to  the  Chaldeans,  or  their  alliance  with  Egypt  should 
not  save  them  in  the  day  of  his  wrath.  "Judgment  also  will  I 
lay  to  the  line,  and  righteousness  to  the  plummet,  and  the  hail 
shall  sweep  away  the  refuge  of  lies,  and  the  waters  shall  overflow 
the  hiding  place.  And  your  covenant  with  death  shall  be  disan- 
nulled, and  your  agreement  with  hell  shall  not  stand  ;  when  the 
overflowing  scourge  shall  pass  through,  then  ye  shall  be  trodden 
down  by  it.  For  the  bed  is  shorter  than  that  a  man  can  stretch 
himself  on  it,  and  the  covering  narrower  than  that  he  can  wrap 
himself  in  it." 

But  however  these  things  might  have  been  written  with  an  im- 
mediate reference  to  the  Jews,  and  to  the  events  of  their  day, 
doubtless  the  chief  design  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  to  teach  them 
and  us  spiritual  and  evangelical  truth.  It  seemed  good  to  the 
Holy  Ghost  in  that  state  of  the  church,  to  teach  the  most  interest- 
ing truths  of  the  gospel  by  outward  types  and  shadows — by  war 
and  peace,  danger  and  safety,  success  and  victory,  defeat  and 
desolation.  Thus  our  text  and  context  are  full  of  instruction  to 
us,  who  live  under  the  gospel,  with  respect  to  our  spiritual  con- 
cerns. Sinners  in  these  days  are  exceedingly  apt  to  neglect  the 
plain  and  sure  way  of  the  gospel  salvation,  and  to  place  their  de- 
pendence for  justification,  either  in  the  sight  of  God  or  to  their 
own  consciences,  or  both,  on  something  quite  as  false  and  delusory 
as  that  to  which  the  Jews  trusted.  They  make  a  refuge  of  lies  ; 
they  betake  themselves  to  vain  and  insufficient  hiding  places 
which  cannot  save  them  from  the  overflowing  scourge  of  divine 
wrath. 

Our  present  subject  therefore  shall  be  to  point  out  and  expose 
some  of  the  refuges  of  lies  of  gospel  sinners. 

By  refuges  of  lies  of  gospel  sinners,  I  mean  not  only  all  false 
grounds  of  confidence  as  to  acceptance  with  God,  but  all  false 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  325 

pretences  on  which  they  justify  themselves,  at  least  in  some  mea- 
sure in  their  own  minds  ;  stifle  the  just  accusations  of  their  own 
consciences,  and  quiet  the  fears  which  both  scripture  and  reason 
tend  to  excite.  These  are  many.  I  shall  attempt  to  notice  only 
a  few  of  them. 

I.   They  often  make  a  refuge  of  their  ignorance. 

When  the  system  of  the  gospel  in  general,  or  any  particular 
doctrine  is  proposed  to  them,  and  they  are  urged  to  receive  it, 
they  plead  that  they  know  not  whether  it  be  the  truth  or  not.  They 
say  tiiat  there  is  much  dispute  in  the  world  about  religion  and  its 
doctrines  ;  that  great  and  wise  men  have  differed,  some  asserting 
and  others  denying  the  same  things  ;  and  which  are  in  the  right 
they  know  not ;  they  have  never  given  themselves  the  trouble  to 
inquire  much  into  such  matters.  All  this  they  own,  as  if  it  were  a 
meritorious  instance  of  virtue  ;  and  add,  perhaps,  that  they  think 
it  would  ill  become  them  to  undertake  to  determine  points  con- 
cerning which  even  the  greatest  and  best  men  have  not  been 
agreed.  Thus  they  shield  themselves  in  their  ignorance  against 
the  charge  of  unbelief,  and  the  claims  of  trutji  and  duty. 

Let  us  attend  to  an  example  or  two  of  this  nature.  If  the 
doctrine  of  original  and  total  depravity  be  urged  upon  them  ;  or 
the  nature  and  necessity  of  regeneration  ;  or  that  the  law  of  God 
is  perfect  in  goodness  and  glory,  and  therefore  of  full  and  eternal 
obligation  ;  or  that  salvation  is  to  be  obtained  only  through  Christ ; 
or  if  any  duty  be  inculcated  or  pressed  upon  them,  as  that  it  is 
now  time  to  exercise  the  spirit  and  begin  the  practice  of  religion  ; 
that  it  is  their  immediate  and  indispensable  duty  to  repent  and 
return  to  the  ways  of  obedience  ;  to  believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ ;  to  become  reconciled  to  God,  so  as  to  love  him  sincerely 
and  supremely,  at  once  they  plead  their  ignorance.  They  know 
not,  they  say,  whether  these  doctrines  be  really  true,  and  there- 
fore they  cannot  at  present  receive  them  ;  they  know  not  whether 
the  exercises  enjoined  on  them  as  duties  be  really  duties  or  not, 
and  therefore  they  must  for  the  present  be  excused  from  their 
performance. 

Now  this  ignorance  is  altogether  voluntary,  as  they  who  plead 
it  generally  take  no  proper  pains  to  remove  it  by  obtaining  right 
information,  so  that  they  may  be  fully  and  reasonably  satisfied.  If 
they  do  not,  at  present,  know  whether  these  things  are  true  or 
not,  yet  they  might  have  known,  or  may  know  now  if  they  will 
but  use  the  means  of  information  which  they  have  in  their  hands. 
But  they  choose  not  to  use  them,  nor  to  obtain  the  knowledge 
which  they  would  afford  ;  they  choose  to  remain  in  their  ignorance, 
and  that  for  these  reasons  : 

28* 


326  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

1.  Because  the  knowledge  of  the  truth  and  duties  of  the  gos- 
pel is  very  disagreeable  and  painful  to  men  in  their  carnal  and 
sinful  state.  These  truths  and  duties  are  to  them  even  disagree- 
able objects  of  attention  and  contemplation.  They  are  not  suited 
to  their  taste,  but  are  directly  opposed  to  it.  .  They  promise  them 
so  long  as  they  remain  of  their  present  characters,  no  good,  either 
in  this  life  or  the  future  ;  but  condemn  them  to  eternal  and  in- 
supportable wo.  They  do  not  justify  the  temper  and  practice  of 
sinners,  but  entirely  disapprove  and  condemn  both.  Now  being 
thus  disagreeable  to  carnal  men,  it  is  no  wonder  they  do  not  at- 
tend to  them  so  far  as  is  necessary  to  the  understanding  and 
knowledge  of  them.  Men  are,  in  any  case,  with  difficulty  in- 
duced to  attend  to  disagreeable  objects,  and  to  seek  after  that 
which  they  believe  will  be  a  source  of  pain  if  they  should  find  it. 
But  the  things  that  engross  the  attention,  such  as  the  pleasures, 
amusements,  profits  and  honors  of  this  world,  are  very  agreeable 
to  their  taste  ;  they  love  them,  and  view  them  as  matters  of  great 
importance.  No  wonder  then  that  these  occupy  their  minds, 
and  exclude  that  attention  to  the  things  before  mentioned  which 
is  necessary  to  the  proper  knowledge  of  them. 

2.  Ignorance  and  a  disbelief  of  the  truth  quiet  the  consciences 
of  sinners  and  prevent  fear.  If  sinners  really  believed  that  they 
are  by  nature  totally  depraved,  and  that  they  are  still  under  the 
influence  of  that  depravity,  they  would  fear  the  consequences. 
If  they  believed  in  the  necessity  of  regeneration,  they  would 
tremble  for  themselves  while  unregenerate.  If  they  beheved  in 
the  necessity  of  an  interest  in  Christ  in  order  to  salvation,  they 
would  of  course  be  alarmed  till  they  should  have  found  that  in- 
terest in  him.  But  so  long  as  they  are  ignorant  of  these  things, 
they  are  not  troubled  with  the  accusations  of  conscience  in  these 
particulars,  nor  with  any  fearful  expectations  of  that  wrath  which 
shall  devour  the  guilty.  And  just  so  with  respect  to  the  duties 
of  Christianity.  If  they  believed  that  they  were  bound  to  an  im- 
mediate compliance  with  the  gospel — at  once  to  repent  and  be- 
lieve on  Christ,  conscience  which  is  God's  faithful  monitor,  would 
accuse  them  for  their  neglect,  and  sting  them  with  many  self  re- 
proaches. But  so  long  as  they  are  ignorant  of  their  duty,  in  these 
or  any  other  particulars,  they  feel  no  uneasiness,  but  are  satisfied 
with  themselves  and  their  conduct. 

3.  The  plea  of  ignorance  is  of  use  to  sustain  their  reputation 
in  the  view  of  others.  If  at  any  time  it  has  been  observed  to 
them  that  they  seem  to  be  negligent  of  religion  in  general,  of 
death  and  another  world,  or  of  any  particular  doctrines  or  duties 
of  Christianity,  they  at  once  plead  that  they  do  not  think  of  these 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  327 

things  as  others  think,  and  therefore  it  need  not  be  matter  of 
wonder  if  they  are  not  influenced  by  things  that  they  do  not  be- 
Heve.  They  do  but  act  according  to  their  sentiments.  Thus 
they  maintain  a  show  of  consistency,  and  on  that  account  often 
boast  and  triumph  in  their  ignorance,  as  if  it  were  a  glory  to  be 
consistently  wrong. 

This  ignorance  or  unbelief  is  sometimes  afTected  or  pretended. 
They  who  plead  it  have  strong  apprehensions  that  the  things 
which  they  pretend  to  disbelieve  are  true,  if  they  do  not  actually 
believe  them  to  be  so.  Yet  they  pretend  the  contrary  in  vindi- 
cation of  their  wickedness.  But  in  either  case,  whether  this  ig- 
norance be  real  or  pretended,  it  is  but  a  refuge  of  lies,  deceptive 
and  insufficient  to  answer  the  purpose  for  which  they  betake 
themselves  to  it.  It  is  most  manifestly  and  literally  so,  when  it 
is  pretended ;  and  even  when  it  is  real,  inasmuch  as  it  is  volun- 
tary, and  might  be  removed  by  a  careful  and  candid  inquiry,  it 
still  remains  a  refuge  of  lies.  What  if  ministers,  and  other  wise 
and  good  men  do  diflfer  ?  There  is  a  ground  of  faith — of  faith 
that  is  sure  and  safe  ;  and  until  they  have  diligently  studied  God's 
truth,  they  surely  have  no  right  to  complain  that  they  cannot 
find  this  ground. 

II.  Some  make  a  refuge  of  their  good  works. 

By  these  they  both  quiet  their  consciences,  and  hope  to  obtain 
the  divine  favor.  They  are  more  or  less  moral  and  externally 
correct  and  regular  in  their  conduct,  and  of  this  they  make  their 
refuge.  Of  such  we  may  reckon  three  classes  of  men  ;  those 
who  generally  lead  a  moral  life  ;  those  who  are  moral  in  some  re- 
spects, while  in  others  they  are  grossly  immoral  ;  and  those  who 
attend  on  the  external  institutions  of  divine  worship.     And 

1.  Some  in  general  lead  a  moral  life.  They  are  sober  and 
temperate,  just  and  true,  kind  and  pacific,  public  spirited  and 
charitable.  Such  men,  with  all  their  moral  attainments,  if  un- 
sanctified  and  unenlightened  by  at  least  the  common  influences 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  universally  depend  on  what  they  call  their 
good  works  to  render  them  acceptable  in  the  sight  of  God.  Be- 
ing blind  to  their  own  faults,  they  see  not  so  much  of  their  own 
sins  as  they  do  of  the  sins  of  others.  Being  prepossessed  in  their 
own  favor,  as  we  all  are  by  the  influence  of  our  natural  pride  and 
self-love,  they  magnify  their  own  moral  acts,  and  think  them  to 
be  acts  of  real  virtue  and  goodness.  They  shine  in  their  own 
eyes  and  imagine  they  shine  as  much  in  the  eyes  of  others,  and 
even  of  God  himself.  In  short,  in  the  spirit  of  Haman  they  think, 
"  whom  will  the  Lord  so  much  delight  to  honor"  as  themselves. 

But  this  is  a  deceitful  refuge — a  mere  refuge  of  lies.  For  in 
the  first  place  it  is  wholly  a  false  supposition  that  their  works  of 


328  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

morality  are  really  good  works.  They  are  no  more  than  splendid 
sins.  Arising  from  a  wrong  principle  of  heart,  from  mere  self- 
love  or  some  more  depraved  appetite,  and  being  directed  to  a 
wrong  end,  they  are  wholly  destitute  of  all  true  virtue,  all  real 
goodness.  In  them  there  is  nothing  of  duty  ;  and  those  who  per- 
form them,  to  say  the  most,  are  only  God's  best  and  most  re- 
spectable enemies.  Duty  is  the  most  amiable  and  excellent  thing 
in  the  created  universe  ;  it  is  real  goodness  or  true  holiness.  And 
he  who  truly  performs  any  duty,  is  so  far  holy,  as  he  who  per- 
forms all  his  duty  is  complete  in  holiness. 

Again,  the  persons  of  whom  1  am  now  speaking,  fall  into 
another  grand  mistake  in  this  matter.  It  is  this,  that  they  sup- 
pose that  works  really  good  and  virtuous  can  procure  for  them 
acceptance  with  God.  This,  however,  is  a  very  groundless  im- 
agination. If  it  were  true,  it  would  prove  the  atonement  of 
Christ  entirely  needless.  So  that  in  both  these  respects,  the  most 
universal  and  correct  morality  is  but  a  refuge  of  lies,  when  made 
either  on  the  ground  of  quieting  the  conscience,  or  of  securing 
the  favor  of  God. 

2.  There  are  others,  who  are  moral  only  in  parts  of  their  con- 
duct, while  in  others  they  are  grossly  immoral,  who  yet  depend 
for  salvation  on  their  morality  even  though  it  be  such  as  it  is. 
Scarcely  any  man  is  so  immoral  and  abandoned  but  that  he  thinks 
his  goodness  is  such,  as  in  one  way  or  another  far  overbalances 
his  wickedness.  The  drunkard,  the  profane,  the  debauchee, 
will  all  plead  their  honesty,  their  justice,  or  their  acts  of  gene- 
rosity, and  thank  God  perhaps  that  they  are  no  hypocrites.  Those 
which  they  reckon  their  most  amiable  virtues,  they  doubt  not  far 
overbalance  their  peculiar  sins,  and  on  the  whole  they  scruple  not 
to  esteem  themselves  much  better  men  than  most  others,  and  es- 
pecially than  many  who  make  great  professions  of  religion ;  and 
therefore  suppose  they  are  likely  to  obtain  the  eternal  favor  of 
God.  The  like  plea  is  made  by  the  unjust  and  fraudulent,  and 
indeed  by  sinners  of  every  description.  What  if  they  do  injure 
or  defraud  their  neighbor  on  some  occasions  ?  They  are  not 
guilty  of  these  crimes  as  often  as  they  themselves  suffer  in  such 
things  from  others.  So  that  they  are  not  worse,  but  much  bet- 
ter than  many  other  men.  And  what  if  they  do  not  always  ob- 
serve the  golden  rule  of  doing  to  others  as  they  would  wish  that 
they  should  do  to  them  ?  At  least  they  observe  the  rule  which 
they  seem  to  think  sufficient  of  doing  to  others  as  others  actually 
do  to  themselves.  Therefore  though  they  may  not  obtain  the 
first  place  among  good  men,  they  persuade  themselves  that  they 
shall  not  be  seated  lower  than  the  second.  That  this  is  a  refuge 
of  lies  is  self-evident. 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  329 

3.  There  are  also  those  who  attend  on  the  outward  ordinances 
of  worship,  who  in  Hke  manner  depend  on  this  as  the  other  char- 
acters mentioned  do  on  their  morahty.  But  this  also  is  a  refuge 
of  lies.  There  is  no  more  goodness  in  the  bare  outward  attend- 
ance on  ordinances  and  the  means  of  grace,  than  there  is  in  a 
bare  outward  morality.  The  one  can  no  more  recommend  to 
the  favor  of  God  than  the  other.  The  great  test  of  acceptance 
with  him  is,  doing  his  will  from  the  heart ;  and  anything  that 
comes  short  of  this  is  no  evidence  of  such  acceptance.  But  even 
if  there  were  a  real  good  in  attending  on  ordinances,  still  this 
could  not  satisfy  for  sin,  or  in  the  least  appease  the  wrath  of  God. 
There  is,  therefore,  no  dependence  to  be  placed  on  this  as  a 
refuge.     It  is  but  a  refuge  of  lies. 

III.  Some  make  a  refuge  of  the  absolute  goodness  and  grace 
of  God. 

They  have  heard  that  God  is  good  ;  that  he  is  infinite  in  good- 
ness ;  that  he  delights  not  in  the  death  of  the  wicked,  but  chooses 
rather  that  they  should  turn  and  live ;  that  mercy  is  his  darling 
attribute,  (as  it  has  been,  though  improperly,  expressed  by  some) 
and  that  judgment  is  his  strange  work.  These  considerations  af- 
ford them  comfort,  quiet  their  fears,  soothe  their  consciences,  and 
are  the  ground  of  their  hope  and  even  confident  expectation  of 
salvation.  But  they  are  no  more  than  a  refuge  of  lies,  and  that  in 
two  respects. 

1.  Impenitent  sinners  do  but  deceive  themselves  in  imagining 
that  they  are  really  desirous  of  being  saved  by  the  infinite  mercy 
and  grace  of  God.  They  have  no  proper  idea  of  grace  in  the 
case,  nor  of  their  need  of  it.  Grace  can  be  exercised  to  the  ill- 
deserving  only.  There  is  no  grace  in  pardoning  a  person  who 
has  been  guilty  of  no  crime.  Suppose  a  man  arraigned  at  a  hu- 
man tribunal  on  the  charge  of  murder,  but  that  upon  full  inquiry 
it  appears  that  he  is  entirely  innocent  of  the  crime.  The  judge 
in  this  case  is  bound  injustice  to  discharge  him,  and  in  discharg- 
ing him  performs  no  act  of  grace  at  all.  Further,  the  man  must 
deserve  the  very  punishment  from  which  he  is  delivered,  or  else 
there  is  no  grace  in  his  deliverance.  There  is  no  grace  in  par- 
doning a  man  who  is  condemned  to  the  gallows  while  he  deserves 
only  the  punishment  of  a  small  pecuniary  fine.  And  so  there  is 
no  grace  in  saving  sinners  from  hell  unless  they  actually  deserve 
the  eternal  torments  of  that  world  of  misery. 

But  impenitent  sinners  in  general  who  are  hoping  to  be  saved 
by  the  absolute  goodness  and  grace  of  God,  have  no  proper  idea 
that  they  are,  in  this  sense,  and  to  this  degree,  ill-deserving. 
For  the  truth  of  this  assertion,  I  appeal  to  those  who  imagine  they 


330 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 


are  trusting  in  the  infinite  goodness  and  grace  of  God  for  salva- 
tion, and  ask  whether  they  really  admit  and  believe  that  they  de- 
serve the  torments  of  hell,  and  that  those  torments  might  be  in- 
flicted upon  them  with  tlie  most  perfect  justice  ?  If  not,  then  of 
course  they  must  think  they  ought  to  be  saved  from  those  tor- 
ments on  the  footing  of  justice  ;  that  to  save  them  from  them 
would  be  no  more  than  an  act  of  justice,  or  than  what  they  de- 
serve ;  and  that  if  they  are  not  saved,  but  sent  to  them,  they  will 
be  very  hardly  treated.  Of  course,  as  they  suppose  that  God 
will  not  deal  hardly  or  unjustly  with  them,  all  their  expectations 
of  salvation  are  not  at  all  on  the  footing  of  grace,  but  wholly  on 
the  footing  of  justice.  And  in  truth  to  be  saved  by  grace  is  not 
the  object  of  their  desire  ;  they  disdain  the  very  offer  and  idea  of 
it.  Therefore  in  future  let  them  not  plead  the  infinite  mercy 
and  grace  of  God,  nor  amuse  themselves  with  the  expectation  of 
salvation  on  that  footing  ;  for  this  is  not  what  they  desire  or  wish 
for,  nor  can  it  be,  till  they  are  truly  convinced  of  sin  and  of  their 
infinite  ill-desert  on  account  of  it. 

2.  The  expectation  of  salvation  because  God  is  of  infinite 
goodness  and  grace,  is  entirely  groundless  and  delusive  unless 
sinners  comply  with  the  terms  on  which  grace  and  salvation  are 
offered.  It  is  indeed  true  that  God  is  gracious,  infinitely  gra- 
cious. Yet  he  does  not,  nor  ever  will  exercise  pardoning  and 
saving  grace  to  all  mankind.  We  are  told  that  "  strait  is  the 
gate,  and  narrow  is  the  way  that  leadeth  unto  life,  and  few  there 
be  that  find  it."  As  some  will  at  last  enter  into  "  life  eternal," 
so  others  "shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment."  And 
none  are  saved  but  those  who  are  interested  in  the  promises  of 
grace  and  salvation.  These  promises  are  to  men  of  certain  par- 
ticular characters,  and  on  certain  conditions,  such  as  faith,  re- 
pentance, holiness,  reconciliation  to  God,  etc.  "  He  tliat  be- 
lieveth  and  is  baptized,  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned."  "  Except  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish." 
"Without  holiness,  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord."  "  If  any  man 
love  not  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  let  him  be  anathema,  maranatha." 
Therefore  even  the  amiable  and  glorious  divine  perfections  of  in- 
finite goodness  and  grace,  are  perverted  to  a  refuge  of  lies  by  all 
those  of  you  who  expect  to  be  saved  by  those  perfections,  with- 
out a  compliance  with  the  terms  of  the  gospel  on  which  only  sal- 
vation is  offered.  And  to  hope  to  be  saved  in  a  compliance  with 
these  terms,  is  not  to  hope  for  it  on  the  footing  of  God's  absolute 
goodness  and  grace,  but  on  the  footing  of  the  conditional  prom- 
ises of  the  gospel. 

IV.  Many  sinners  make  a  refuge  of  their  own  inability. 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  331 

On  this  ground  they  excuse  themselves  from  almost  every  duty, 
particularly  from  the  great  duties  of  repentance  and  faith  and  re- 
conciliation to  God.  Their  plea  is  that  they  are  poor,  lost,  de- 
praved creatures  ;  that  they  are  so  blinded  by  their  original  cor- 
ruption that  they  cannot  even  see  their  duty ;  that  they  are  so 
weak  and  feeble  that  they  can  do  nothing  in  religion  ;  and  par- 
ticularly that  they  cannot  comply  with  the  gospel,  so  as  to  be  en- 
titled to  its  promises.  This  is  their  perpetual  refuge  ;  and  when- 
ever any  duty,  and  especially  a  compliance  with  the  gospel  is 
pressed  upon  them,  they  immediately  fly  to  it.'  With  it  they 
quiet  their  consciences  in  their  neglect  and  indifference — looking 
upon  themselves  as,  in  reality,  perfectly  excusable,  and  of  course, 
if  consistent,  supposing  that  they  are  and  shall  be  actually  ex- 
cused in  the  sight  of  God.  But  if  this  refuge — this  strong  hold 
of  sinners  be  examined,  I  presume  it  will  be  found  to  be  entirely 
false  and  delusory — a  mere  refuge  of  lies.  "  The  bed  is  shorter 
than  that  a  man  can  stretch  himself  on  it,  and  the  covering  nar- 
rower than  that  a  man  can  wrap  himself  in  it." 

The  inability  of  sinners  is  of  a  peculiar  kind.  It  is  an  inabil- 
ity of  the  heart  only  ;  an  inability  wherein  they  are  wholly  vol- 
untary— to  which  they  consent  and  which  they  prefer  and  choose. 
It  ought,  therefore,  to  be  called  an  indisposition  rather  than  an 
inability.  For  indeed  it  consists  wholly  in  an  indisposition  of 
heart  to  truth  and  duty.  If  this  indisposition  were  removed — if 
it  were  not  voluntarily  cherished,  the  inability  would  wholly  cease. 
If  sinners  were  but  willing  to  receive  and  obey  the  truth,  they 
would  be  sufficiently  able.  Now  surely  this  indisposition,  this 
unwillingness  to  receive  and  obey  the  truth  can  be  no  excuse  for 
any  sin  whether  of  omission  or  commission,  being  in  itself  a  very 
great  sin  and  the  root  of  all  other  sins.  As  well  might  the  un- 
dutiful  and  rebellious  child  plead  his  inveterate  hatred  of  his  good 
parent  as  an  excuse  for  his  undutiful  conduct  toward  that  parent, 
or  the  murderer  plead  his  malice  to  justify  his  murder. 

But  the  sinner  pleads,  further,  that  he  cannot  cure  this  indis- 
position ;  that  he  cannot  make  himself  willing  to  love  and  obey 
the  truth.  In  the  same  sense  cannot  the  drunkard  make  him- 
self willing  to  forsake  his  cups  and  to  be  temperate  and  sober. 
In  the  same  sense  cannot  the  indolent  man  make  himself  willing 
to  apply  industriously  to  the  business  of  his  calling.  In  the  same 
sense,  the  malicious  man  cannot  renounce  his  malice,  and  over- 
come his  evil  temper,  and  imbibe  and  act  from  the  principles  of 
good  nature  and  humanity.  In  the  same  sense  the  covetous  and 
churlish  cannot  divest  themselves  of  their  narrow  and  selfish 
spirit,  and  become  generous  and  beneficent.     Yet  no  man  sup- 


332  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

poses  that  these,  or  that  any  other  vicious  characters  are  at  all 
excusable  on  account  of  their  respective  inabilities.  And  no 
more  is  the  impenitent  sinner  to  be  excused  on  account  of  his 
inability  to  repent  and  believe  the  gospel. 

But  the  sinner  again  pleads  that  he  did  not  bring  this  inability 
on  himself,  but  was  born  with  it.  If  he  had  brought  it  on  him- 
self, he  will  allow,  perhaps,  that  he  would  have  been  blamable  on 
account  of  it.  But  as  he  did  not  bring  it  on  himself,  he  thinks 
this  fact  ought  in  justice  to  excuse  him.  But  let  us  examine  this 
point  by  the  examples  just  adduced.  The  malicious,  the  ill-na- 
tured, the  peevish,  the  covetous  and  churlish,  are  all  frequently 
born  with  their  respective  evil  biases ;  and  these  peculiar  biases 
may  be  discerned  in  them  even  when  they  are  children,  and  long 
before  they  have  had  time  to  contract  them  from  the  evil  exam- 
ples of  others.  Yet  none  of  us  suppose  that  they  are  on  that  ac- 
count to  be  excused  in  their  several  vices,  or  vicious  tempers. 
Therefore  the  being  born  with  a  vicious  bias  does  not,  in  the 
common  sense  of  mankind,  excuse  any  man  in  the  indulgence  of 
that  evil  bias,  or  in  the  evil  practice  that  flows  from  it.  For  the 
same  reason,  the  being  born  with  a  heart  indisposed  to  comply 
with  the  gospel,  excuses  no  man  in  his  neglect  to  comply  with  it. 
You  yourselves  who  make  this  plea  to  excuse  your  impenitence 
and  unbelief,  do  not  at  all  excuse  your  neighbor  who  is  constantly 
acting  a  malicious  part  toward  you,  because  he  was  born  with  a 
vicious  temper.  Be  not,  then,  so  inconsistent  with  yourselves  as 
to  urge  this  apology  in  your  own  vindication.  You  cannot  but 
see  that  it  is  a  refuge  of  lies  ;  therefore  trust  to  it  no  longer. 

But  as  this  is  such  a  favorite  refuge  of  sinners — one  to  which 
they  so  often  and  constantly  resort,  I  am  willing  to  consider  it  in 
various  lights,  in  order  if  possible  to  drive  them  from  it.  If,  then, 
this  were  a  true  and  safe  refuge  for  them,  it  would  certainly  be 
acknowledged  as  such  by  God.  If  it  be  a  sufficient  excuse  for 
the  depraved  sinner  in  neglecting  to  comply  with  the  gospel  that 
he  is  naturally  indisposed  to  comply,  then  God  would  doubtless 
allow  it.  He  would  allow  that  every  sinner  who  is  naturally  in- 
disposed to  comply  with  the  gospel,  may  with  impunity  continue 
in  non-compliance  ;  would  allow  that  if  he  goes  as  far  as  he  has 
a  heart  to  go,  he  would  do  all  that  he  is  in  duty  bound  to  do. 
He  would  allow  that  the  impenitent  sinner  is  under  no  obligation 
to  repent,  but  may  with  a  clear  conscience  and  with  entire  im- 
punity remain  in  his  impenitence.  He  would  allow  that  the  un- 
believer is  under  no  obligation  to  believe  on  Christ,  but  may  still 
persist  in  his  unbelief ;  and  that  no  enemy  to  God  is  under  ob- 
ligation to  become  reconciled  to  him,  but  may  still  with  safety 


FALSE   REFUGES  UNSAFE.  333 

remain  at  enmity  with  him.  He  would  also  allow  that  no  wick- 
ed, unregenerate  sinner,  no  matter  how  abominable  his  character, 
is  under  any  obligation  to  become  a  good  man,  and  a  true  chris- 
tian but  that  he  may  witli  imj)unity  still  continue  as  he  is. 

But  how  is  it  in  fact  ?  Does  God  indeed  give  us  such  a  lati- 
tude as  to  duty  or  obligation  as  this  ?  Do  the  scriptures  which 
contain  his  word  si)eak  this  language  ?  Where  are  the  passages  ? 
I  may  safely  challenge  you  to  point  them  out,  and  boldly  assert 
that  you  will  be  able  to  produce  nothing  of  this  nature  from  the 
whole  word  of  God.  On  the  contrary,  there  sinners  are  called 
on,  exhorted,  and  commanded  to  comply  with  the  gospel  ;  and 
promises  are  made  to  them  if  they  do  comply  while  threatenings 
are  denounced  against  them  if  they  do  not.  "  Repent  ye,  there- 
fore, and  be  converted  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out."  '•  Ex- 
cept ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  "  Believe  on  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  thou  shall  be  saved."  "  He  that  be- 
lieveth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  but  he  that  believeth  not 
shall  be  damned."  ''  Thou  shall  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with 
all  thy  heart,  and  soul,  and  mind,  and  strength,"  "  As  he  which 
■hath  called  you  is  holy,  so  be  ye  holy  in  all  manner  of  conversa- 
tion." 

If  again,  this  plea  of  inability  be  a  true  and  safe  refuge  for 
sinners,  then  the  validity  of  it  would  be  allowed  at  the  final  judg- 
ment ; — and  on  the  ground  of  it  God  would  acquit  all  who  could 
with  truth  make  it.  For  God  is  a  perfectly  just  judge,  and  at 
the  last  day  will  allow  every  sinner  to  make  any  just  plea  in  his 
own  vindication,  and  will  give  it  its  full  weight.  So  that  if 
this  be  a  just  plea  or  excuse  for  impenitence,  or  unbelief,  or 
any  other  sin,  no  man  at  the  day  of  judgment  will  be  condem- 
ned for  those  sins  ;  but  God  will  say  to  him  if  impenitent,  "  Well 
done,  thou  good  and  faithful  servant,  thou  didst  not  indeed  re- 
pent as  I  in  the  gospel  commanded  you  to  do,  but  thou  hadst  no 
heart,  no  willingness  to  obey,  to  repent  and  forsake  thy  sins,  and 
on  this  ground  I  acquit  thee.  Enter  into  the  joy  of  thy  Lord." 
To  the  unbeliever  he  will  say,  "  Thou  hast  indeed  rejected  the 
gospel,  and  all  its  offered  grace  ;  thou  hast  treated  with  perfect 
contempt  my  only  begotten  and  well  beloved  son,  yet  as  thou 
wast  wholly  unwilling  to  accept  the  former,  or  receive  and  trust 
in  the  latter,  this  is  a  sufficient  excuse.  Therefore  I  acquit 
thee.  Well  done,  good  and  faithful,  enter  into  the  joy  of  thy 
Lord."  This  I  say  we  might  certainly  expect  would  be  the  lan- 
guage of  our  great  judge,  if  there  were  any  force  in  the  plea  of 
inability  to  comply  with  the  gospel.  But  how  contrary  to  all 
this  is  the  language  of  our  Savior  !     "  This,"  he  says,  <'  is  the 

Vol.  n.  29 


334  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

condemnation  that  light  hath  come  into  the  world,  and  men  have 
loved  darkness  rather  than  light  because  their  deeds  are  evil.'^ 
And  again,  "  If  I  had  not  come  and  spoken  unto  them,  they 
had  not  had  sin  ;  but  now  they  have  no  cloak  for  their  sin."  In 
the  same  spirit,  too,  is  that  passage  from  the  apostle,  '•  How  shall 
we  escape  if  we  neglect  so  great  salvation  ?  He  that  despised 
Moses'  law  died  without  mercy  under  two  or  three  witnesses. 
Of  how  much  sorer  punishment,  suppose  ye,  sliall  he  be  thought 
worthy,  who  hath  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  count- 
ed the  blood  of  the  covenant,  wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  un- 
holy thing,  and  hath  done  despite  to  the  spirit  of  grace  ?" 

From  all  this  it  appears  that  there  is  no  force  in  the  self-justi- 
fying plea  of  sinners  drawn  from  their  inability  to  repent  and  be- 
lieve and  comply  with  the  gospel  ;  that  unbelief  is  the  great  sin 
of  the  evangelized  world  ;  and  that  it  will  be  the  chief  cause  of 
their  final  and  eternal  condemnation  at  the  last  great  day. 

V.  Some  men  have  recourse  at  diffei'ent  times,  to  all  these 
refuges,  or  pei'haps  to  several  of  them  at  the  same  time. 

They  do  not  depend  upon  any  one  of  these,  but  flee  to  them 
all  as  a  general  city  of  refuge  consisting  of  so  many  particular 
fortresses  or  citadels  ;  and  when  beaten  from  one  they  betake 
themselves  to  another ;  sometimes  they  plead  in  justification  of 
themselves  their  ignorance,  and  that  they  are  not  satisfied  as  to 
the  doctrines  and  duties  of  the  gospel ;  but  being  convinced  of 
the  insufficiency  of  this  plea,  and  that  they  might  inform  and  sat- 
isfy themselves  if  they  would,  and  that  therefore  their  ignorance 
is  voluntary  and  inexcusable,  they  have  recourse  to  their  good 
works — their  justice,  morality,  or  outward  attendance  on  means, 
and  depend  on  these  in  the  manner  already  described.  Being 
driven  hence  by  a  conviction  of  the  imperfection  and  insufficien- 
cy of  their  good  works,  they  fly  to  the  absolute  and  infinite  mer- 
cy and  grace  of  God.  Being  driven  hence  they  shield  themselves 
under  their  inability.  And  when  this  is  made  to  appear  inade- 
quate to  their  purpose,  they  fly  back  to  some  of  their  former 
refuges,  endeavoring  to  rest  on  them  as  a  satisfying  ground  of 
hope. 

Sometimes,  too,  as  I  have  already  hinted,  they  will  take  posses- 
sion of  several  of  these  refuges  at  the  same  time,  expecting  to 
make  up  by  the  others  what  is  wanting  in  some  of  them.  For 
example,  they  think  themselves  in  a  good  measure  excusable  on 
account  of  their  ignorance.  But  fearing  to  depend  wholly  on  this, 
so  far  as  they  do  know,  they  plead  that  they  have  good  works  to 
show,  and  bring  them  in  aid  of  their  ignorance.  Not  daring, 
however,  to  pretend  to  perfection  of  goodness,  they  hope  God 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  335 

will  be  merciful  and  overlook  their  imperfections.  And  still  be- 
ing doubtful  of  this,  they  derive  much  ease  and  comfort  from 
their  inability.  Thus  they  have  a  manifold  ground  of  depen- 
dence ;  and  what  is  lacking  in  one  part  they  expect  will  be  sup- 
plied by  another.  But  as  every  part  is  essentially  deficient — is 
wholly  a  refuge  of  lies,  the  same  is  true  of  the  whole  taken  to- 
gether. 

Before  I  leave  this  head,  I  cannot  but  observe,  that  often  sin- 
ners pervert  the  most  wholesome  and  important  truths  in  order 
to  quiet  their  consciences  or  justify  themselves.  When  they  are 
taught  the  total  depravity  of  human  nature,  they  own  it  perhaps, 
and  make  themselves  easy  on  that  subject  by  saying,  "  What  can 
such  poor,  lost,  depraved  creatures  do  in  religion  ?  surely  nothing 
at  all."  When  on  the  other  hand  they  are  exhorted  to  repent, 
and  believe,  and  coujply  with  the  gospel,  they  at  once  fly  to  the 
idea  that  they  are  not  totally  depraved,  but  have  a  good  princi- 
ple within  them,  which  they  need  but  to  cultivate  to  make  them 
good  enough.  When  they  are  shown,  however,  that  none  but 
the  regenerate  ever  do  or  will  comply  with  God's  requirements, 
they  quietly  sit  down  in  the  idea  that  being  unregenerate  and 
having  no  power  to  comply,  they  are  not  therefore  to  be  blamed. 
When,  however,  they  are  taught  that  they  are  to  be  blamed  for 
not  complying  with  the  gospel,  and  that  their  inability  is  only  and 
wholly  voluntary,  and  of  the  moral  kind,  then  they  take  courage, 
and  flatter  themselves  that  they  have  power  enough,  and  can  use  it 
whenever  they  wish,  and  in  this  idea  become  self-sufficient  and 
self-righteous  ;  and  presuming  on  the  future,  neglect  religion  for 
the  present.  In  this  manner  do  sinners  fly  from  one  excuse  to 
another  and  pervert  the  most  wholesome  truths  of  the  gospel,  in 
order  to  quiet  their  consciences  and  go  on  calmly  and  without 
remorse  in  the  way  that  leads  to  hell.  Amazing  their  folly  !  As- 
tonishing their  madness ! 

Besides  these,  I  might  mention  several  other  false  refuges  of 
sinners  under  the  gospel — such  as  the  general  custom,  or  the  ex- 
ample of  individuals  ;  a  false  conversion,  wherein  they  have  had 
great  terrors,  and  then  great  comforts  ;  great  zeal,  but  not  accord- 
ing to  knowledge  ;  inward  suggestions  and  impulses,  etc.  But 
time  does  not  permit  me  to  enlarge  on  any  of  these,  or  on  seve- 
ral others  that  I  might  mention.  I  rather  hasten  to  close  with 
some  practical  uses  and  reflections.     And, 

1.  Let  me  entreat  you,  my  hearers,  carefully  to  examine  your- 
selves in  view  oj  this  subject.  You  see  something  of  what  it  is 
to  betake  yourselves  to  refuges  of  lies — refuges  which  God  will 
sweep  away.     Apply,  then,  these  general  observations  to  your- 


336  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

selves,  feeling  that  they  may  have  reference  to  your  case.  It  is 
not  for  me  to  point  out  by  name  those  who  betake  themselves  to 
such  false  refuges.  But  you  are  to  judge,  in  the  light  of  God's 
truth,  of  your  own  characters,  whether  or  not  you  are  of  this  de- 
scription. Doubtless  there  are  many  such  in  the  world  ; — but 
who  and  where  are  they  ?  Are  there  none  in  our  country  and 
nation  ?  Are  there  not  some  in  this  place — in  this  house  ?  Why 
not  here  as  well  as  anywhere  else  ?  To  suppose  that  we  are  so 
much  better  than  those  of  any  other  place  or  community,  would 
neither  be  consistent  with  reason,  or  christian  humility,  or  even 
decent  modesty.  It  is  admitted  by  all  to  be  a  time  of  general 
ease  and  indifference  as  to  spiritual  things.  What  is  the  cause 
of  it  ?  If  men  did  but  see  and  believe  the  truth,  having  at  the 
same  time  no  false  refuge  to  quiet  them,  could  they  remain  so 
listless  and  secure  ?  Would  not  the  love  of  God  melt,  and  the 
wrath  of  God  make  them  tremble  ?  It  is  impossible  but  that  it 
should  be  so.  And  so  long  as  they  are  secure  in  sin,  they  have 
some  refuge  of  lies  by  which  they  are  lulled  into  this  fearful  drow- 
siness. And  as  this  is  the  case  with  secure  sinners  in  general, 
so  it  is  undoubtedly  the  case  with  the  secure  sinners  of  this  as- 
sembly— with  every  one  of  you  who  hear  me  this  day  who  are 
out  of  Christ,  and  exposed  to  the  danming  curse  of  God's  holy 
law,  while  yet  you  are  unconcerned  about  it.  I  entreat  you, 
therefore,  to  examine  carefully  and  candidly  what  is  your  refuge 
— what  your  ground  of  confidence — what  the  cause  of  your  pres- 
ent security  and  negligence  of  your  everlasting  interests  ?  Is  it 
a  pretence  of  ignorance,  and  want  of  satisfying  information  as  to 
the  truth  ?  Or  is  it  the  plea  of  innocence  and  good  works  ?  Or 
is  it  your  own  inability,  or  the  infinite  grace  and  mercy  of  God  ? 
Put  these  questions  to  yourselves,  not  in  a  hasty  and  careless 
manner,  but  seriously,  deliberately,  and  with  candid  reflection  upon 
your  own  temper  and  conduct.  Remember  that  God  is  present 
with  you  while  you  are  doing  it.  And  if  upon  such  an  exami- 
nation you  shall  find  that  you  are  making  a  refuge  of  any  or  all 
of  tiiese  things,  then, 

2.  Be  exhorted  at  once  to  abandon  them.  Remember  that 
they  are  refuges  of  lies,  which  will  deceive  you  just  in  proportion 
as  you  put  your  confidence  in  them.  You  would  not  choose  to 
be  deceived  as  to  your  temporal  affairs.  Much  less  should  you 
wish  to  be  in  affairs  of  infinite  moment,  in  those  that  relate  to 
the  salvation  of  the  soul.  But  these  false  refuges  will  deceive 
you  to  your  eternal  ruin.  Or  rather  now  they  will  not  deceive 
you  ;  for  so  far  as  they  have  been  made  known  to  you,  you  can- 
not be  deceived  by  thena.     You  now  know  what  they  are,  and 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  337 

what  is  your  danger  from  them.  If,  then,  you  still  will  trust  to 
them,  you  do  it  wilfully,  against  the  light  of  your  own  minds,  with 
your  eyes  open,  and  knowing  what  the  consequences  will  be  to 
yourselves.  Consider,  then,  those  consequences  as  they  are  ex- 
pressed in  the  strong  and  even  terrible  language  of  our  text. 
"  Tlie  hail  shall  sweep  away  the  refuge  of  lies,  and  the  waters 
shall  overflow  the  hiding  place."  "  As  it  was  in  the  days  of 
Noah,  so  shall  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  be."  In  the  days 
of  Noah  the  waters  overflowed  the  loftiest  habitations  of  man, 
and  even  the  peaks  of  the  highest  mountains,  and  swept  the  in- 
habitants of  the  world  from  all  their  refuges  of  supposed  safety 
away  to  ruin  and  death.  All  the  high  places  of  the  earth  proved 
to  them  but  refuges  of  lies.  The  waters  also  rolled  themselves 
into  all  the  caves  and  dens  of  the  earth,  and  drowned  those  who 
had  there  taken  refuge.  "  And  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Lot,  so 
shall  the  coming  of  the  Son  of  Man  be."  The  fire  and  brimstone 
which  God  rained  down  from  heaven  on  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom 
soon  consumed  or  swept  away  their  places  of  refuge,  as  though 
it  had  been  by  a  deluge  of  liquid  fire.  And  so  shall  all  your  vain 
hiding  places  and  your  false  refuges  be  overflowed  and  swept 
away,  and  you  too  if  you  continue  in  them,  in  that  dreadful  storm 
of  wrath  and  fiery  indignation  which  God  will  pour  down  upon 
the  wicked.  What  *hen  will  you  do  for  a  refuge — for  a  hiding 
place,  when  the  universe  is  dissolved  and  the  world  is  in  flames? 
How  will  you  then  be  amazed  when  you  shall  find  your  founda- 
tion giving  way  from  beneath  you — when  you  shall  find  by  too 
late  experience  that  all  that  was  told  you  of  false  confidences  and 
refuges  of  lies,  was  real  truth  ?  How  will  you  be  vexed  at  your- 
selves, and  at  your  madness  in  trusting  to  them,  and  that  too 
when  you  were  so  clearly  and  fully  warned  of  your  danger? 
Deep  must  have  been  the  vexation  and  self-reproaches  of  the  old 
world,  and  the  inhabitants  of  Sodom,  at  their  own  folly  and  mad- 
ness, when  they  found  all  the  predictions  of  Noah  and  Lot  veri- 
fied, and  also  found  that  though  they  had  had  sufficient  opportu- 
nity to  escape,  yet  now  it  was  too  late,  and  they  must  perish  ! 
Cut  far  greater  is  the  folly  and  madness  of  which  you  are  guilty, 
in  neglecting  to  escape  from  not  a  temporal  death  or  deluge,  but 
from  the  endless  wrath  and  vengeance  of  God,  which  will  not 
only  sweep  you  away  from  all  your  false  confidences,  but  will 
bury  you  in  eternal  death  and  wo,  where  their  worm  dieth  not, 
and  their  fire  is  not  quenched. 

Especially  what  consummate,  what  infinite  folly  and  madness 
are  you  guilty  of  in  trusting  to  any  refuge  of  lies  when  a  true  and 

29* 


338  FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE. 

proper  ^nd  perfectly  safe  refuge  is  provided  for  you  and  freely 
offered  to  your  acceptance.  "  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  Behold 
I  lay  in  Zion  for  a  foundation,  a  stone,  a  tried  stone,  a  precious 
corner  stone,  a  sure  foundation  ;  he  that  believeth  shall  not  make 
haste."  Here  is  a  sure  and  safe  hiding  place  ;  for  God  himself 
hath  declared  that  "  a  man  shall  be  a  hiding  place  from  the  wind 
and  a  covert  from  the  tempest,  as  rivers  of  waters  in  a  dry  place, 
and  the  shadow  of  a  great  rock  in  a  weary  land."  Abandon, 
then,  all  false  refuges,  all  vain  hiding  places,  and  come  to  this 
sure  foundation,  this  refuge  of  safety.  To  it  you  are  invited,  and 
urged,  and  besought  to  flee,  by  the  strongest  and  most  persuasive 
motives  that  can  be  either  exhibited  or  conceived.  Yield  then 
to  those  motives,  and  flee  to  this  refuge  that  you  may  be  safe  for- 
ever. Or  if  you  will  not  do  this — if  you  will  not  abandon  your 
false  confidences  and  grounds  of  hope,  at  least  let  me  obtain  one 
thing  of  you.     And  that  is, 

3.  That  you  will  at  least  act  an  open  and  manly  and  decided 
part  in  this  important  affair.  Confess  openly  that  you  do  and 
that  you  mean  to  make  lies  your  refuge,  and  under  falsehood  to 
hide  yourselves.  It  is  best  to  be  open  and  explicit  in  our  tem- 
poral affairs,  and  much  more  so  in  things  that  relate  to  eternity. 
By  "  a  fair  show  in  the  flesh"  you  may  indeed  deceive  men  but 
you  cannot  deceive  God.  He  knows  your  real  character  and 
temper  and  conduct  as  well  without  this  confession  as  with  it. 
Nothing,  therefore,  can  be  gained  by  concealment.  On  the  other 
hand  an  open  acknowledgment  of  the  real  truth  may  tend  to 
strike  conviction  to  your  own  consciences,  to  bring  your  charac- 
ters to  your  own  view,  and  make  you  attend  to  your  own  hearts. 
In  this  view  it  may  be  of  signal  service  to  you,  for  it  may  waken 
and  rouse  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come.  Confess  then 
openly  and  plainly  that  for  the  sake  of  present  peace  of  conscience 
and  to  quiet  the  fears  of  God's  wrath — that  in  order  to  gratify 
your  carnal,  covetous  or  ambitious  desires  you  are  resolved  to  lay 
hold  of  every  plausible  ground  of  hope  of  God's  favor,  or  of  fu- 
ture safety  and  felicity,  and  of  every  plausible  excuse  for  your 
own  impenitence  and  unbelief.  Admit  that  you  care  not  what 
the  pretence  or  excuse  is,  if  you  can  but  persuade  yourself  that  it 
is  true,  and  can  find  in  it  present  peace.  Admit  that  you  are  re- 
solved to  grasp  the  present  world,  and  present  comfort,  no  matter 
what  becomes  of  the  future  ;  that  you  are  determined  to  secure  your 
temporal  interest,  and  to  enjoy  the  pleasures  of  this  life,  whether 
in  the  future  you  inherit  heaven  or  hell — whether  you  are  saved 
or  damned.     Admit,  in  short,  that  for  your  part  you  will  eat  and 


FALSE  REFUGES  UNSAFE.  339 

drink  though  tomorrow  you  die ;  that  you  will  say  to  your  soul, 
"  take  thine  ease,  eat,  drink  and  be  merry,"  though  it  be  at  the 
hazard  of  hearing  that  awful  voice  from  the  heavens,  "  Thou  fool ! 
this  night  thy  soul  shall  be  required  ;"  admit  all  this,  and  it  might 
alarm  you,  and  by  God's  grace  it  might  rouse  you  to  work  out 
your  salvation  with  fear  and  trembling. 


SERMON   XXI. 


THE  P.\RTING   COi^IMENDATION.* 

Acts  20:  S^. — And  nou\  brethren,  I  commend  you  to  God  and  to  the  word  of 
his  grace,  ichich  is  able  to  build  you  up,  and  to  give  you  an  inheritance  among 
all  them  which  are  sanctified. 

In  this  chapter  is  an  account  of  part  of  Paul's  journey  from 
Philippi  to  Jerusalem.  Ephesus  was  in  proconsular  Asia.  It 
was  a  place  where  the  apostle  had  labored  much,  and  where  at 
one  time  he  had  spent  two  years,  (ch.  19:  8 — 1 1.)  He  was  the 
founder  of  the  church  there  ;  the  spiritual  father  of  its  members. 
He  had  built  them  up  and  made  them  what  they  were.  And 
now  as  he  is  going  to  Jerusalem,  not  knowing  what  was  to  befal 
him  there  ;  as  he  could  not  visit  Ephesus,  he  sends  from  Miletus, 
a  sea-port  near,  for  the  elders  of  the  Ephesian  church  to  come 
and  meet  him.  On  their  arrival  he  addresses  them  in  a  very  af- 
fectionate and  solemn  manner  in  the  farewell  discourse  of  which 
our  text  is  a  part.  He  tells  them  in  much  tenderness  that  they 
shall  see  his  face  no  more  ;  and  then  after  advice  on  various 
points  he  leaves  them  with  God  in  the  language  of  our  text. 
"And  now,  brethren,  I  commend  you  to  God  and  to  the  word  of 
his  grace,  which  is  able  to  build  you  up,  and  to  give  you  an  in- 
heritance among  all  them  which  are  sanctified." 

In  dwelling  on  these  words,  I  would  show  1.  What  it  is  to 
commend  to  God,  and  to  the  word  of  his  grace ;  2.  What  is  pre- 
supposed in  this  ;  3.  In  what  sense  his  word  is  able  to  build  us 
up,  and  to  give  us  an  inheritance  among  them  that  are  sanctified. 

I.  What  is  it  to  commend  to  God,  and  to  the  word  of  his 
grace  1 

1.  What  is  it  to  commend  to  God  1     It  is, 

*  A  farewell  discourse  to  the  church  and  society  in  New  Haven,  May 
24,  1795.  The  body  of  this  sermon,  as  far  as  the  "Improvement,"  was 
left  by  the  author  iu  the  shape  of  brief  notes.  As  these  notes  have  been 
filled  up  only  by  the  addition  of  the  needful  connecting  words,  the  dis- 
course as  here  presented  gives  but  an  imperfect  idea  of  what  it  nnist  have 
been  as  originally  delivered.  The  application  was  written  out  in  full  by 
the  author. 


THE  PARTING  COMMENDATION.  341 

(1)  To  leave  with  God.  It  is  to  leave  the  individual  to  his 
guidance  and  counsel,  to  his  gracious  teaching  and  to  the  influ- 
ence of  his  spirit.  By  his  spirit  he  influences  all  good  men.  He 
restrains,  animates  and  excites  them  to  duty.  He  guards  them 
from  mistakes  and  temptations,  from  dishonoring  his  name,  from 
sins  of  omission  and  of  commission.  All  are  liable  to  innumera- 
ble errors,  to  mistakes  in  judgment  both  through  misinformation 
and  depraved  passions  ; — are  liable  to  the  influence  of  corruption 
within  ;  and  to  constant  and  sore  temptations  from  the  world  and 
the  great  adversary  of  the  soul.  And  from  all  these  things  we 
need  protection,  and  God  is  able  and  willing  to  render  it  to  us. 
And  to  commend  one  to  God,  is  to  leave  him  with  God  for  this 

end. 

Nor  is  this  all.  We  not  only  need  protection  but  to  be  ex- 
cited to  duty  ;  to  love  God  and  his  law,  and  Christ  and  his  gos- 
pel ;  to  love  the  Lord  our  God  with  all  our  heart  and  our  neigh- 
bor as  ourselves  ;  to  cherish  the  spirit  of  repentance,  and  humil- 
ity, and  meekness,  and  gentleness,  and  all  tlie  christian  graces. 
We  also  need  to  be  incited  to  christian  practice.  It  is  not  suffi- 
cient that  we  have  the  temper  of  Christ ;  but  we  are  to  carry  out 
that  temper  in  our  practice,  and  endeavor  to  do  so  perfectly. 
We  should  aim  at  entire  obedience  to  the  will  of  God.  And  for 
this  holy  practice,  we  need  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and 
to  commend  one  to  God  is  to  leave  him  with  God  for  this  end, 
that  he  may  obtain  this  influence  to  sanctify  him  for  every  good 
word  and  work. 

To  commend  one  to  God  is  also  to  leave  him  with  God,  that 
grace  may  be  given  him  according  to  his  day.  It  is  to  leave  him 
with  God  in  prosperity,  that  he  may  use  it  aright ;  that  he  may 
not  be  lifted  up  with  pride  or  vanity  or  ostentation,  so  as  to  per- 
vert his  blessings  to  covetousness  or  any  unhallowed  ends  ;  but 
that  he  may  use  them  with  humility,  with  a  feeling  sense  of  his 
dependence,  with  devout  gratitude,  acknowledging  God  in  them 
all,  and  ever  remembering  his  accountability,  and  that  with  all 
he  has  he  is  bound  to  do  good  as  the  steward  and  servant  of 
Christ.  It  is  also  to  commend  him  to  God's  grace  in  adversity, 
that  he  may  be  supported  ;  that  he  may  neither  faint  nor  be  stu- 
pid under  the  divine  dealings  ;  that  he  may  neither  murmur  nor 
despise  the  chastening  of  the  Lord,  but  receive  it  as  the  disciplme 
of  a  wise  and  tender  parent.  And  in  general  it  is  to  leave  with 
God,  that  in  all  circumstances  of  life,  whatsoever  they  may  be, 
his  grace  may  be  according  to  our  need. 

(2)   To  commend  others  to  God,  is  also  to  pray  to  God  for 
them  according  to  their  circumstances  and  necessities.     It  is  to 


342  THE   PARTING   COMMENDATION. 

offer  earnest  prayer  for  them  that  they  may  be  kept  from  all  evil 
and  excited  to  all  good  ;  that  they  may  be  kept  from  dishonoring 
God,  from  bringing  reproach  to  his  name  or  injury  to  his  cause. 
It  is  to  pray  that  they  may  be  excited  to  the  exercise  of  every 
christian  temper  and  the  practice  of  every  christian  duty,  so  as  in 
all  things  to  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God  our  Savior.  These  two 
things,  then,  seem  mainly  to  be  implied  in  commending  a  person 
to  God  ;  that  we  commit  him  in  confidence  to  the  divine  keeping 
and  guidance,  and  that  by  earnest  prayer  we  ask  for  him  all  need- 
ed grace  and  blessing,  for  all  the  circumstances  of  life. 

2.  What  is  it  to  commend  a  person  to  the  word  of  God's 
grace  1     It  is, 

(1)  Earnesdy  to  recommend  to  him  a  firm  belief  of  the  gos- 
pel. This  is  the  word  of  his  grace  ;  the  word  that  reveals  and 
teaches  his  grace,  and  that  freely  offers  it  to  all.  And  this  word 
must  be  believed,  if  we  would  derive  from  it  any  spiritual  bene- 
fit. 

(2)  It  is  to  recommend  an  habitual  attention  to  the  gospel. 
It  is  to  urge  to  the  daily  and  serious  perusal  of  it,  and  to  a  faith- 
ful attendance  on  all  the  means  of  grace,  in  which  it  is  expound- 
ed and  made  plain. 

(3)  It  is  to  recommend  a  cordial  complacency  in  the  gospel. 
This  is  essential.  If  any  man  love  not  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
he  must  be  anathema — accursed.  Any  faith  that  does  not  lead 
to  this,  is  but  a  dead  faith. 

(4)  It  is  to  recommend  a  practice  according  to  the  gospel. 
We  must  be  not  only  hearers  of  the  word  but  doers. 

(5)  It  is  to  recommend  a  persevering  adherence  to  the  gos- 
pel ;  to  all  its  doctrines  and  all  its  precepts.  It  is  only  by  con- 
tinuance in  well  doing  that  we  can  secure  to  ourselves  glory  and 
honor  and  immortality  ;  only  by  being  faithful  unto  death  that  we 
shall  receive  a  crown  of  life. 

II.  What  is  presupposed  in  commending  a  person  to  God 
and  to  the  word  of  his  grace  ? 

It  presupposes  that  we  are  entirely  dependent  on  God  ;  that  we 
are  not  sufficient  for  ourselves.  We  are  dependent  on  him  to  pre- 
serve and  protect,  to  excite  and  animate,  in  our  faith  and  our  prac- 
tice. We  ever  need  the  assisting  grace  of  God  that  we  may  be 
faithful  and  accepted  in  duty.  Difficulties  and  dangers  are  about 
us,  and  we  need  to  be  guided  and  kept  and  saved  from  them. 
Siimers  are  not  awakened  and  converted,  and  there  is  danger 
that  many  of  them  may  never  be.  Christians  have  declined  in 
spirituality,  and  grown  cold  and  formal,  and  by  falling  into  temp- 
tation and  inconsistency  have  dishonored  the  cause  of  Christ. 


THE  PARTING  COMMENDATION.  343 

The  church  is  not  free  from  danger ;  danger  of  divisions  and  er- 
rors and  general  coldness  and  backsliding.  And  in  all  these  re- 
spects we  are  dependent  on  God  to  keep  us  by  his  mighty  power 
through  faith  unto  salvation.  This  is  the  foundation — the  ground 
of  necessity  for  commending  ourselves  to  God  and  to  the  word 
of  his  grace. 

III.  In  what  sense  is  the  word  of  divine  grace  able  to  build 
us  up,  and  give  us  an  inheritance  among  all  them  that  are 
sanctified  1 

1.  It  is  adapted  to  build  us  up.  By  the  word  of  grace  is  meant 
the  gospel.  This  is  adapted  to  our  edification.  It  is  fitted  to 
instruct  and  animate,  and  excite  to  every  grace  ;  to  lead  us  to 
repentance  and  faith  in  Christ,  to  hnmility  and  love  and  joy,  to 
meekness  and  gentleness,  and  all  the  graces  of  the  spirit. 
Its  truths  and  facts  and  promises,  its  invitations  and  warnings,  all 
the  views  which  it  presents  of  Christ  and  of  eternity,  are  adapted 
to  produce  this  effect  upon  us.     And, 

2.  God  has  promised  they  shall  have  this  effect  on  those  who 
receive  and  improve  them.  "  Then  shall  we  know  if  we  follow 
on  to  know  the  Lord."  And  of  the  servant  that  wisely  improved 
his  Lord's  money  it  is  said,  "  To  him  that  hath  shall  be  given." 
Edification,  then,  is  inseparably  connected  with  a  due  improve- 
ment of  the  word. 

In  the  same  senses  is  the  gospel,  as  applied  by  the  Holy  Spirit, 
able  to  give  us  an  inheritance  among  them  that  are  sanctified. 
It  is  adapted  to  produce  these  effects  that  are  found  in  the  sanc- 
tified, and  to  which  their  inheritance  \s  promised ;  so  that  if  we 
comply  with  it,  and  faithfully  improve  it,  we  shall  have  a  title, 
through  divine  grace  to  that  inheritance,  and  finally  be  received 
to  enjoy  it  forever. 

IMPROVEMENT. 

It  now  remains  that  I  make  the  application  of  this  subject  to 
the  present  important  and  solemn  occasion.  You,  brethren,  and 
I,  have  long  been  united  in  a  most  intimate  and  tender  and  so- 
lemn relation.  It  is  twenty-six  years,  last  January,  since  I  was 
constituted  your  pastor.  Among  you  I  have  spent  my  youth  and 
the  vigor  of  my  life.  We  have  been  together  in  joy  and  sorrow. 
I  have  endeavored  to  be  faithful  to  you  as  a  minister  of  the  New 
Testament,  and  you  I  would  hope  have  endeavored  to  improve 
my  ministry.  At  length,  God,  in  his  wise  providence,  has  so  dis- 
posed events  that  the  relation  between  us  is  dissolved.  And  I 
could  think  of  no  more  proper  words  from  which  to  address  you 
in  this  my  farewell  discourse  than  those  of  our  text.     I  could 


344  THE  PARTING  COMMENDATION. 

think  of  nothing  that  more  truly  expresses  the  feelings  of  my 
heart  than  these  words  of  the  apostle.  "  And  now,  brethren,  I 
commend  you  to  God  and  to  the  word  of  his  grace,  which  is 
able  to  build  you  up,  and  to  give  you  an  inheritance  among  all 
them  which  are  sanctified."  A  christian  pastor  leaving  his  peo- 
ple, ought  certainly  to  leave  them  with  God  and  with  the  word 
of  his  grace  ;  earnestly  to  pray  to  God  for  them,  and  to  recom- 
mend them  to  go  to  God  for  every  needed  good.  And  this, 
brethren,  I  most  cordially  and  solemnly  do  for  you. 

It  is  an  agreeable  circumstance  that  our  separation  has  been 
attended  with  so  much  calmness  and  moderation.  To  have  sep- 
arated in  any  other  manner  would  have  been  very  unsuitable  to 
the  character  of  christians  which,  before  God  and  men,  we  have 
assumed.  Let  us  still  observe  the  same  line  of  conduct  and  per- 
severe in  it.  This  church  have  unanimously  voted  me  "  their 
thanks  for  all  the  good  they  have  experienced  by  my  ministry  ; 
the  assurance  of  their  brotherly  love  and  high  respect  for  me, 
and  of  their  prayers  for  the  success  of  my  future  ministry."  And 
on  my  part,  I  have  "  thanked  them  for  all  their  expressions  of 
kindness  to  me  during  my  ministry  among  them,  and  have  as- 
sured them  of  my  brotherly  love  and  respect  for  them,  and  of  my 
prayers  for  their  future  prosperity."  This  is  truly  commending 
each  other  to  God  and  the  word  of  his  grace.  May  his  bless- 
ing and  his  grace  ever  be  with  us. 

As  it  has  been  my  duty  for  so  many  years  to  give  you  such  in- 
struction and  advice  as  appeared  to  be  founded  in  truth  and  pro- 
fitable to  you,  so  it  is  now  highly  proper  that  I  should  continue 
to  give  similar  advice  in  this  my  farewell  discourse. 

You,  brethren  of  this  church  and  society,  have  from  the  begin- 
ning professed  to  believe  the  great  distinguishing  doctrines  of  free 
grace.  This  has  been  your  glory.  Let  me  beseech  you  to  per- 
severe in  tiie  same  faith  and  [)rofession,  and  to  hold  fast  the  form 
of  sound  words  once  delivered  to  the  saints.  These  are  limes  of 
degeneracy.  Corrupt  principles  and  practices  amazingly  prevail 
in  our  land.  Even  gross  infidelity  lifts  up  its  head  among  us, 
and  much  more  other  loose  and  most  dangerous  principles.  I 
entreat  you  to  be  on  your  guard  against  them.  The  church  is 
the  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth.  Let  this  church  ever  be,  and 
ever  appear  to  be  a  firm  pillar  and  ground  of  the  truth  in  this 
place.  For  this  end  let  it  guard  against  the  first  encroachments 
of  error  and  false  doctrine.  It  is  much  easier  to  withstand  the 
entrance  of  these,  than  to  eradicate  them  after  they  have  once 
taken  root.  And  consider  how  dishonorable  as  well  as  ruinous 
it  will  be,  for  you  to  give  up  these  essential  evangelical  truths, 


THE  PARTING   COMMENDATION.  345 

on  which  you  have  hitherto  been  established.  Be  faithful,  too, 
as  a  churcli  to  the  obedience  of  the  faith.  Live  yourselves  so  as 
to  be  lights  in  the  world,  so  as  to  be  epistles  of  Christ  known  and 
read  of  all  men.  Let  your  light  so  shine  before  men,  that  they 
shall  be  led  to  glorify  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven.  As  indi- 
vidual professors  be  holy  ;  and  as  a  church  keep  yourselves  pure, 
by  being  careful  in  the  admission  of  members,  and  if  need  be  by 
wholesome  discipline. 

Another  advice  proper  to  this  occasion,  is,  that  which  Joseph 
gave  to  his  brethren  after  he  had  made  himself  known  to  them. 
"  See  that  ye  fall  not  out  by  the  way."  Divisions  in  churches 
and  societies  are  exceedingly  common  in  these  days.  How  many 
congregations  have  been  by  division  broken  up  and  destroyed  ! 
Diversity  of  sentiments  concerning  doctrine  and  discipline  is  the 
common  cause  of  ecclesiastical  divisions.  But  if  you,  brethren, 
hold  fast  to  the  sound  doctrines  of  your  fathers,  you  will  not  be 
divided  by  this  cause.  Private  views,  ambitious  projects,  resent- 
ment of  real  or  supposed  injuries  or  abuses,  are  the  sources  of  di- 
vision. I  hope,  brethren,  you  will  diligently  guard  yourselves 
against  them,  and  against  everything  tending  to  mar  the  peace 
and  prosperity  of  the  church. 

Let  me  further  exhort  you,  not  only  to  hold  the  truth,  but  to 
hold  it  in  the  love  and  in  active  obedience  of  it.  To  love  and  to 
obey  the  truth  are  as  necessary  as  to  believe  it.  Indeed  that  be- 
lief of  it  which  implies  love  and  a  disposition  to  obey,  is  the  only 
belief  to  which  all  the  promises  of  the  gospel  are  made.  There- 
fore cultivate  this  faitii  in  your  own  souls  with  all  diligence  and 
prayer  to  God.  Enjoin  it  too  upon  your  children  and  the  rising 
generation,  that  when  you  shall  have  gone  to  your  rest,  they  may 
be  prepared  to  fill  your  places  in  this  as  well  as  in  other  respects. 
The  rising  generation  is  the  hope  of  the  flock.  If  they  be  suf- 
fered to  grow  up  in  loose  principles  and  practices,  it  will  be  no 
wonder  if  religion  both  in  practice  and  profession  decline  among 
you.  If  on  the  other  hand  you  that  are  parents  do  what  in  you 
lies  to  teach  and  inculcate  on  your  children  good  principles,  good 
affections  and  good  practices,  exhibiting  yourselves  proper  exam- 
ples, and  attending  all  with  your  fervent  prayers  to  the  fatlier  of 
mercies  that  he  would  crown  your  exertions  with  his  blessing  and 
grace,  you  have  many  and  great  encouragements  that  it  shall  not 
be  in  vain.  Having  thus  addressed  you  all  as  a  church  in  gene- 
ral, I  would  now  conclude  with  an  application  to  several  classes 
of  persons  in  particular. 

1 .  To  the  church  of  Christ  in  this  place.  This  church  is  a 
city  set  on  a  hill.     It  stands  in  a  conspicuous  place,  easily  seen 

Vol.  n.  30 


346  THE  PARTING  COMMENDATION. 

and  actually  observed.  Your  professed  attachment  to  the  doc- 
trines of  grace,  has  rendered  you  more  abundantly  the  objects  of 
observation.  It  concerns  you  therefore  on  this  account  to  act  a 
consistent  and  uniform  part.  If  you,  brethren,  should  betray  your 
principles  and  renounce  your  former  purity  in  doctrine  and  dis- 
cipline, what  a  wound  would  you  give  to  the  cause  of  truth  ; 
what  a  dishonor  to  yourselves  ;  what  an  occasion  of  grief  to  all 
the  friends  of  Jesus,  and  of  exultation  and  triumph  to  the  enemies 
of  the  cross !  Wherefore  take  heed  to  yourselves  and  your 
whole  christian  conduct,  both  as  a  church  and  as  individuals. 
In  so  doing  you  will  adorn  the  doctrine  of  God  your  Savior,  and 
after  my  departure  from  you  I  shall  still  have  the  joy  of  hearing 
that  you  are  walking  in  the  truth. 

2.  Let  me  address  those  who  are  not  professors  of  7'eligion, 
There  are  many  such  in  this  society.  You  have  not  yet  seen  fit 
to  come  forward  and  confess  Christ  before  men  by  an  explicit 
confession  of  the  gospel,  and  by  publicly  entering  into  covenant 
with  him.  Some  of  you  may  stand  thus  at  a  distance  from  mere 
scruples  as  to  your  preparation,  and  others  from  an  apprehension 
but  to  well  founded  that  you  are  not  at  all  prepared.  As  to  the 
former  of  these  classes,  it  becomes  them  to  endeavor  to  have  their 
scruples  removed  by  the  evidence  of  the  truth,  and  then  openly 
to  confess  Christ  agreeably  to  his  own  positive  directions.  As  to 
those  who  are  really  unprepared  for  the  seals  of  the  covenant, 
they  ought  to  remember  that  their  want  of  preparation  is  their 
own  sin,  and  therefore  will  never  justify  them  in  the  sight  of  God. 
It  is  the  indispensable  duty  of  all  to  become  prepared,  and  then 
to  make  an  open  confession  to  the  world  that  they  have  chosen 
the  Lord  as  their  God  and  Christ  as  their  Savior.  And  till  they 
do  this  they  are  inexcusable  in  the  sight  of  God.  And  now  that 
I  am  about  to  close  my  ministry  here  and  to  leave  you  who  are 
of  this  class,  it  is  affecting  to  think  that  I  leave  you  in  this  state, 
unprepared  for  the  Lord's  supper,  and  therefore  unfitted  for  death 
and  heaven.  May  God,  of  his  infinite  mercy,  have  pity  on  yon, 
and  awake  and  convert  you,  and  thus  prepare  you  for  his  ordi- 
nances here,  and  for  heaven  hereafter. 

3.  T  would  also  address  myself  to  all  who  are  careless  sinners. 
Of  these  there  are  several  descriptions.  Some  are  grossly  im- 
moral ;  others  are  moral.  Some  neglect  the  means  of  grace  and 
ordinances  of  worship  ;  others  attend  on  these  ordinances.  But 
all  are  careless  and  secure  in  their  Christless  state.  And  now 
that  I  am  about  to  leave  this  people,  so  long  under  my  charge, 
it  is  melancholy  and  affecting  to  leave  any  of  you  still  without 
God  and  without  hope  ;  to  leave  you  in  a  world  that  is  full  of 
temptations  and  snares  that  may  entangle  and  destroy  your  souls. 


THE   PARTING   COMMENDATION.  347 

But  to  leave  so  many  of  you  careless  and  unaffected  with  your 
situation,  with  your  deep  guilt  and  exposure  to  God's  wrath,  is 
still  more  sad  and  grievous.  O  !  let  me  beseech  you  in  all  the 
earnestness  and  tenderness  of  this  our  parting  hour,  as  I  have 
often  done  in  time  past,  to  awake  from  these  your  dangerous 
slumbers  lest  soon  it  be  forever  too  late.  By  the  value  of  your 
souls  and  the  alarming  danger  of  their  eternal  loss,  awake  ye 
who  are  thus  sleeping  and  arise  from  the  dead  that  Christ  may 
give  you  life. 

4.  I  would  address  those  of  you  ivho  are  thoughtful  and 
anxiouslij  inquiring  the  way  of  salvation.  It  is  a  token  for 
good  that  there  are  some  such  among  us.  It  shows  that  God 
has  not  entirely  forsaken  us.  May  he  greatly  increase  the  num- 
ber of  such,  and  bring  their  awakenings  to  a  saving  issue.  In 
tiie  mean  liiue  let  me  beseech  those  of  you  who  are  the  subjects 
of  such  awakenings  to  take  heed  that  you  resist  not  and  quench 
not  the  Holy  Sj)irit  of  God  which  is  striving  with  you.  En- 
courage his  inrtuences,  and  comply  with  his  dictates.  Hear,  that 
your  souls  may  live.  Do  this,  and  God  will  make  an  everlast- 
ing covenant  with  you,  even  the  sure  mercies  of  David.  But  if 
you  diaw  back,  God  shall  have  no  pleasure  in  you,  and  you  will 
make  your  perdition  sure. 

5.  In  the  last  place  I  would  address  in  a  few  words  this  whole 
society.  As  already  observed,  we  have  been  connected  as  min- 
ister and  people  for  more  than  six  and  twenty  years.  How  I 
have  discharged  my  duty  in  this  important  relation,  and  how 
you  have  improved  under  my  ministry,  it  does  not  become  me 
to  declare.  But  God  is  our  common  judge.  Before  him  we 
are  all  soon  to  stand,  and  render  our  account.  I  must  answer 
whether  I  have  faithfully  delivered  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus, 
and  declared  the  whole  counsel  of  God  ;  and  you  must  answer 
whether  you  have  received  and  loved  and  obeyed  the  truth  which 
has  been  delivered  to  you.  May  those  of  you  who  have  profited 
by  the  truth,  profit  still  more  and  more.  May  those  who  have 
not,  yet  profit  by  it  in  future.  And  may  God  provide  for  your 
future  instruction  and  spiritual  good,  such  means  as  may  have 
the  most  direct  and  powerful  tendency  to  lead  you  all  to  himself. 
Particularly  may  he  provide  for  you  a  pastor  after  Iiis  own  heart, 
who  shall  be  abundantly  qualified  for  the  duties  of  the  ministry 
among  you,  and  who  by  the  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  co-op- 
erating with  his  labors,  shall  be  abundantly  successful  in  win- 
ning souls  to  Christ. 

'•  Finally,  brethren,  farewell  I  Be  perfect ;  be  of  good  comfort ; 
be  of  one  mind  ;  live  in  peace  ;  and  the  God  of  love  and  peace 
shall  be  with  you.     Amen  !" 


SERMON  XXII. 


GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF  ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS  AND  ACTIONS.* 

Philippians  2 :  13. — //  is  God  which  ivorhdh  in  you  bolh  to  ivill  and  to  do  of  his 

good  pleasure. 

The  gospel  is  a  scheme  of  salvation  on  certain  conditions. 
These  are  reconciliation  to  God,  repentance  of  sin,  and  cordial 
faith  in  Christ  as  an  atoning  Redeemer.  But  how  are  we  to  at- 
tain to  these  christian  graces  ?  Our  text  informs  us.  "  It  is  God 
which  worketh  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure." 

From  these  words  I  propose  to  show,  1.  That  God  is  the  au- 
thor of  all  our  good  dispositions ;  "  he  worketh  in  us  to  will ;" 
2.  That  he  is  the  author  of  all  our  good  actions  ;  "  he  worketh 
in  us  to  f/o;"  and  3.  That  both  these  are  the  effects  of  his  sov- 
ereign grace  ;  "  of  his  good  pleasure.^^ 

I.  God  luorks  in  us  "  to  will,"  and  is  the  author  of  all  good 
dispositions. 

This  is  abundant!}'  taught  in  the  sacred  scriptures.  2  Cor.  3: 
5,  "  Not  that  we  are  sufficient  of  ourselves,  to  think  anything  as 
of  ourselves  ;  but  our  sufficiency  is  of  God."  Heb.  13:  20,  21, 
"  Now  the  God  of  grace  make  you  perfect  in  every  good  work  to 
do  his  will,  working  in  you  that  which  is-  well  pleasing  in  his 
sight,"  etc.  1  Pet.  5:  10,  "  But  the  God  of  all  grace,  who  hath 
called  us  unto  his  eternal  glory  by  Jesus  Christ,  after  that  ye  have 
suffered  awhile,  make  you  perfect,  establish,  strengthen,  settle 
you."  John  15:  5,  "He  that  abideth  in  me  and  I  in  him,  the 
same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit:  for  without  me  ye  can  do  noth- 
ing." James  1:  17,  "  Every  good  gift  and  every  perfect  gift  is 
from  above,  and  cometh  down  from  the  Father  of  lights,  with 
whom  is  no  variableness,  neither  shadow  of  turning."  1  Cor. 
15:  10,  "  By  the  grace  of  God,  I  am  what  I  am  :  and  his  grace 
which  was  bestowed  upon  me,  was  not  in  vain  ;  but  I  labored 
more  abundantly  than  they  all ;  yet  not  I,  but  tlie  grace  of  God, 
which  was  with  me." 

Again,  all  morally  good  dispositions  are  implanted  in  the  heart 


*  First  preached  before  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut,  1794. 


GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF  ALL  GOOD,  ETC.  349 

in  regeneration.  For  naturally  all  men  are  wholly  indisposed  to 
the  love  and  service  of  God,  and  to  the  exercise  and  practice  of 
true  religion,  in  which  compliance  with  the  gospel  consists.  In 
r<;generation  the  heart  is  reconciled  to  God,  to  his  character,  to 
his  will,  to  his  law,  to  his  government,  to  his  sovereign  grace,  and 
to  the  conditions  of  salvation  revealed  in  the  gospel.  It  also  be- 
comes disposed  to  love  mankind  in  general  with  sincere  benevo- 
lence, and  true  christians  with  both  benevolence  and  complacen- 
cy. Thus  it  is  disposed  to  all  virtue  and  all  piety.  But  regene- 
ration is  the  work  of  God.  John  1:  12,  13,  "  But  as  many  as 
received  him,  to  them  gave  he  power  to  become  the  sons  of  God, 
even  to  them  that  believe  on  his  name  ;  which  were  born,  not  of 
blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of  man  ;  but  of 
God."     Thus  God  works  in  us  to  will. 

II.  God  also  works  in  us  "  to  do,''''  and  is  the  author  of  all 
good  actions. 

To  do,  in  the  sense  of  this  passage,  is  something  more  than  to 
will.  It  is  not  mere  mental,  but  external  doing.  All  right  ex- 
ternal conduct  implies  a  good  heart,  or  will ;  but  not  every  de- 
gree of  goodness  of  heart  is  sufficient  to  lead  to  general  external, 
obedience.  Some  higher  and  peculiar  degree  of  goodness  of  heart 
and  temper  is  necessary  to  this.  And  this  higher  degree  of  good- 
ness of  heart  is  from  God.  As  he  gives  the  lowest,  so  he  does 
the  highest ;  and  such  a  degree  whether  it  be  the  highest  or  not, 
as  will  lead  to  sincere  christian  obedience.  He  that  begins  a 
good  work,  nmst  carry  it  on  in  all  its  steps.  "  Paul  rhay  plant, 
and  A  polios  water,  but  God  must  give  the  increase." 

III.  These  are  the  effects  of  God's  sovereign  grace  ;  the  ef- 
fects of  his  good  pleasure." 

Here  it  may  be  proper  to  explain  what  we  mean  by  the  divine 
sovereignty. 

1.  We  mean  that  God  is  absolutely  supreme  and  uncontrolled. 
This  must  needs  be  the  case,  as  he  is  omnipotent,  and  without  a 
superior.  To  suppose  that  he  is  under  control,  is  to  suppose  he 
is  not  the  supreme  being ;  but  that  he  by  whom  he  is  controlled 
is  superior  to  him.  Dan.  4:  35,  "  None  can  stay  his  hand,  or  say 
unto  him,  what  doest  thou  ?" 

2.  The  sovereignty  of  God  implies  that  he  ever  acts  as  he 
pleases.  Ps.  135:  6,  '•  Whatsoever  the  Lord  pleased,  that  did  he, 
in  iieaven  and  in  earth,  in  the  seas  and  all  deep  places." 

3.  That  the  sovereignty  of  God  does  not  imply,  that  he  acts 
arbitrarily.  This  is  the  erroneous  and  groundless  construction 
which  some  give  of  the  divine  sovereignty  :  that  God  acts  as  he 
pleases,  merely  because  he  pleases  or  wills  to  do  so ;  and  not  be- 

30* 


350  GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF 

cause  it  is  the  dictate  of  wisdom  and  according  to  eternal  right. 
But  such  an  idea  of  sovereignty  is  dishonoring  to  God.  Though 
he  always  does  what  pleases  him,  yet  he  always  pleases  to  do 
what  wisdom  dictates  and  what  is  subservient  to  the  general  good 
of  the  moral  system  ;  and  this  is  always  right  and  best,  is  always 
perfectly  wise  and  benevolent,  and  directly  subservient  to  the 
most  glorious  and  important  ends. 

This  sovereignty  is  exercised  by  God,  in  working  in  some  of 
mankind  both  to  will  and  to  do  ;  in  working  in  them  powerfully 
and  effectually  as  he  pleases  and  on  whom  he  pleases,  and  yet 
wisely  and  benevolently. 

I  am  well  aware  that  to  this  doctrine  of  the  sovereign  and  ef- 
ficacious grace  of  God,  several  objections  have  been  raised.  Let 
us  consider  some  of  these,  that  if  they  appear  to  have  sufficient 
weight,  we  may,  as  in  that  case  we  ought  to  do,  reject  the  doc- 
trine ;  but  if  not,  that  we  may  be  the  more  firmly  established  in 
the  belief  of  it. 

1.  It  is  objected,  that  if  God  work  in  us  all  good  dispositions 
of  heart  and  actions  of  life,  this  destroys  our  agency  ;  that  on 
this  plan  we  do  nothing,  but  God  does  all  ;  that  all  our  actions 
are  the  mere  actions  of  God,  and  that  we  are  no  agents  at  all  but 
mere  patients.  To  this  I  answer,  that  these  consequences  by  no 
means  follow  from  our  doctrine.  Though  God  work  in  us  both 
to  will  and  to  do,  yet  we  are  agents  and  do  act.  This  is  express- 
ly taught  in  our  context  taken  with  the  text.  "  Work  out  your 
own  salvation,  with  fear  and  trembling ;  for  it  is  God  which  work- 
eth  in  you  both  to  will  and  to  do  of  his  good  pleasure."  There- 
fore though  God  work  all  in  us,  yet  we  do  work  out  our  own  sal- 
vation. This  is  perfectly  agreeable  to  reason  as  well  as  to  scrip- 
ture. If  God  do  produce  holy  exercises  and  acts  in  us,  still  they 
are  our  acts,  as  much  so  as  those  thoughts  which  God  excites  in  us 
are  our  thoughts  ;  and  we  might  as  well  say  that  those  thoughts 
are  not  ours,  but  the  thoughts  of  the  divine  mind,  as  to  say  that 
those  volitions  which  God  produces  in  us  are  not  our  acts,  but 
the  acts  of  God.  If  God  excite  in  any  man,  evangelical  repen- 
tance and  godly  sorrow  for  sin,  will  it  be  pretended  that  it  is  not 
the  repentance  and  sorrow  of  the  man  in  whose  mind  they  are 
excited,  but  the  repentance  and  sorrow  of  the  divine  mind  ?  And 
if  God  produce  in  a  man  that  faith  which  is  his  gift,  whereby  the 
man  trusts  in  Christ  as  his  Savior,  will  it  be  pretended  that  this 
trust  is  not  the  trust  of  the  man,  but  an  act  in  which  God  him- 
self trusts  in  Christ  as  his  Savior  ?  Such  is  the  absurdity  into 
which  this  objection  plunges  the  objector.  Such  is  the  absurdity 
of  supposing  that  an  act  caused  by  the  Deity  in  us,  is  not  our 
.own  act,  but  the  act  of  him  who  caused  it. 


ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS   AND  ACTIONS.  351 

In  further  answer  to  this  objection,  it  may  be  useful  to  consid- 
er wluit  is  an  action  and  what  an  agent.  If  we  establish  the  true 
idea  of  these,  it  will  immediately  appear  whether  we  are  agents, 
and  whether  we  act  or  do  anything,  or  whether  we  are  mere  pa- 
tients. Those  who  make  this  objection  mean  by  aciion  a  self- 
determinate  action,  of  which  we  are  the  sole  efficient  causes. 
And  by  agent,  they  mean  one  who  acts  thus  self-determinately, 
and  sets  himself  to  action  by  his  own  efficiency.  Now  if  this  be 
the  true  idea  of  action  and  agent,  I  grant  that  any  emotion  pro- 
duced in  us  by  God  is  not  our  action,  and  that  in  such  emotion 
we  are  not  agents.  For  it  is  absurd  and  contradictory,  that  an 
emotion  should  be  the  sole  effect  of  God,  and  yet  the  sole  effect 
of  ourselves  ;  or  that  in  that  emotion  we  should  be  entirely  self- 
moved  and  determined  by  our  own  efficiency,  and  yet  tiiat  we 
should  be  moved  and  determined  by  a  divine  efficiency.  But  I 
deny  that  this  is  the  true   idea  of  an  action  and  of  an  agent. 

A  self-determinate  action  is  an  absurdity  and  an  impossibility. 
It  runs  into  an  infinite  series  of  actions  determining  or  causing 
one  another.  The  present  volition,  for  example,  of  any  man's 
mind,  must  be  caused  by  a  preceding  volition  ;  and  that  preced- 
ing volition  must,  for  the  same  reason,  be  caused  by  another  pre- 
ceding that,  and  that  by  another,  and  so  on  forever,  or  at  least 
until  you  arrive  at  the  first  volition  of  which  the  man  was  ever 
the  subject ;  and  that  by  the  supposition  being  the  first,  cannot 
have  been  caused  by  a  preceding  volition  of  that  man,  and  there- 
fore is  not  self-determined,  and  according  to  the  forementioned 
definition  is  no  action.  And  for  the  same  reason,  all  the  subse- 
quent volitions  arising  from  this  as  its  cause,  being  not  self-deter- 
minate, are  no  actions.  Therefore  this  scheme  confutes  itself; 
for  though  it  assumes  to  be  the  only  scheme  which  admits  of  ac- 
tion and  agency  in  man,  yet  it  really  excludes  all  action  and  agen- 
cy from  us. 

Another  absurdity  attending  this  idea  of  action  and  agency  is, 
that  though  it  is  sui)posed  that  the  mind  causes  one  volition  by 
another,  and  that  the  causing  volition  is  distinct  from  the  caused 
volition,  still  it  will  be  found  that  they  in  fact  are  not  distinct 
from  each  other,  but  really  coincide,  and  are  one  and  the  same. 
Let  us  take  as  an  example  this,  that  a  man  determines  himself  to 
read  a  cliapter  in  tlie  bible.  In  the  first  place  he  determines  or 
chooses  to  read  the  chapter.  But  this  choice  is  caused  by  a  pre- 
ceding choice.  Therefore  he  chooses  to  choose  to  read  the  chap- 
ter. But  what  is  this  beside  a  barely  choosing  to  read  it  ?  It  is 
manifestly  nothing  different  from  it,  but  is  the  very  same  thing ; 
and  after  all  this  parade  of  our  choice  causing  or  choosing  ano- 


352  GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF 

iher,  there  is  nothing  but  a  bare  choice,  or  determination  to  read 
the  chapter.  Let  us  take  another  example.  Suppose  a  man  de- 
termines himself  to  love  God.  He  does  it  by  choosing  to  love 
him  ;  that  is  he  chooses  to  love  God  before  he  loves  him,  and 
thus  causes  the  love  of  God  in  his  own  heart.  But  this  choos- 
ing to  love  God  is  no  other  than  actually  loving  him,  and  cannot 
be  distinguished  from  it.  In  whatever  sense,  and  from  whatev- 
er motive  a  man  chooses  to  love  God,  in  the  same  sense,  and 
from  the  same  motive,  in  some  degree  at  least,  he  actually  does 
love  him.     But  I  need  not  multiply  examples. 

Another  absurdity  attending  this  supposition,  that  a  man  caus- 
es his  own  volitions,  is,  that  he  causes  them  without  motive  and 
without  design,  and  therefore  blindly,  and  by  mere  chance.  The 
advocates  for  the  self-determining  power,  universally  oppose  and 
reject  the  idea  that  we  are  influenced  by  motives,  and  suppose  it 
to  be  as  inconsistent  with  human  agency  and  action,  as  the  doc- 
trine of  a  divine  influence  working  in  us  all  good  dispositions  and 
actions.  Therefore  it  would  be  inconsistent  in  them  to  allow 
that  we  exercise  the  self-determining  power  under  the  influence 
of  motives.  Such  a  self-determination  as  this,  is  no  self-deter- 
mination at  all,  but  a  determination  by  motives.  Self-determin- 
ation therefore  is,  in  its  very  nature,  a  determination  without  mo- 
tive ;  and  a  determination  without  motive,  is  a  determination 
without  design  ;  and  a  determination  without  design,  is  a  deter- 
mination in  the  dark,  or  a  blind  determination,  a  determination 
at  hap-hazard  and  by  mere  chance.  And  such  an  action  as  this 
is  neither  virtuous  nor  vicious  ;  and  is  worthy  of  neither  praise 
nor  blame. 

If  it  be  said  that  the  mind  does  indeed  determine  itself  in  ev- 
ery act,  and  is  the  efficient  cause  of  its  own  volitions,  but  not  by 
a  preceding  volition,  then  the  inquiry  will  arise,  "  How  then  does 
it  efficiently  cause  its  own  volitions  ?"  If  it  cause  them  by  an 
act  of  the  will,  it  causes  them  by  a  preceding  volition.  If  it 
cause  them  not  by  an  act  of  the  will,  it  does  not  cause  them  vol- 
untarily ;  and  it  will  not  be  pretended  that  a  man  acts,  or  is  an 
agent  in  causing  or  doing  anything  involuntarily,  and  without  his 
will. 

As  to  that  part  of  the  objection  which  states,  that  if  God  work 
all  good  dispositions  and  actions  in  us  we  are  mere  patients  and 
not  agents,  it  may  be  observed  that  our  good  dispositions  and  ac- 
tions either  have  a  cause,  or  they  have  no  cause.  If  they  have  a 
cause,  that  cause  is  either  ourselves  or  one  extrinsic  to  ourselves. 
It  cannot  be  ourselves,  for  the  reasons  already  given.  It  must 
therefore  be  an  extrinsic  cause.     If  they  have  no  cause  at  all, 


ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS  AND  ACTIONS.  353 

we  are  no  more  the  cause  of  them  than  we  are  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  they  are  the  effect  of  an  extrinsic  cause.  And  conse- 
quently if  agency  consists  in  causing  our  actions  internal  as  well 
as  external,  we  are  no  more  agents  on  the  supposition  that  our 
volitions  came  into  existence  without  a  cause,  than  we  arc  on  the 
supposition  that  they  are  the  effect  of  an  extrinsic  cause.  Besides 
the  advocates  for  that  kind  of  agency  which  I  am  opposing  will 
not  pretend  that  our  volitions  came  into  existence  without  any 
cause,  and  by  mere  chance. 

Tt  remains  therefore,  as  they  would  avoid  the  forementioned 
absurdities  attendiiig  the  supposition  that  our  volitions  are  the  ef- 
fects of  our  own  efficiency  ;  that  they  allow  that  they  are  the  ef- 
fects of  an  extrinsic  cause  ;  and  this  extrinsic  cause  may,  as  con- 
sistently with  our  agency,  be  the  Deity  as  any  other. 

Nor  is  there  any  difficulty  in  allowing  tliis,  if  we  have  just  ideas 
of  action  and  agency  ?  The  true  idea  of  internal  or  mental  ac- 
tion is,  that  it  consists  in  volition  or  voluntary  emotion  ;  and  of 
external  action,  that  it  is  an  action  of  the  body  proceeding  from 
volition. 

Now  this  being  the  true  idea  of  an  action  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  allowing  that  it  may  be  the  effect  of  some  extrinsic  cause.  A 
volition  is  a  volition,  let  it  be  the  effect  of  what  it  may,  whether 
of  an  intrinsic,  or  an  extrinsic  cause.  And  as  a  volition  may  be 
the  effect  of  an  extrinsic  cause,  so  may  an  action  be;  for  every 
volition  is  an  action. 

As  to  that  part  of  the  objection  which  represents  that  we  are 
mere  patients  in  volition  if  it  be  produced  by  an  extrinsic  cause, 
I  observe  ;  that  though  we  are  patients  in  that  we  are  the  sub- 
jects of  the  operation  of  the  cause  which  produces  volition,  yet 
we  are  active  in  the  volition  itself;  just  as  a  body  which  is  acted 
upon  by  another  body,  and  thus  set  in  motion,  is  a  patient,  in  that 
it  is  acted  upon  by  that  body,  but  in  the  motion  which  is  the  im- 
mediate effect,  it  is  active. 

If  it  should  be  still  urged,  that  a  volition  produced  by  an  ex- 
trinsic cause  is  no  action  at  all,  because  it  is  not  produced  by  the 
man  whose  volition  it  is  ;  this  would  be  a  shameful  begging  of  the 
question.  It  would  be  taking  it  for  granted,  that  an  action  in  its 
very  nature  is  and  must  be  self-determinate,  which  is  the  very 
thing  in  dispute. 

2.  Another  objection  to  our  doctrine  is,  that  if  God  work  all 
good  dispositions  and  actions  in  us,  we  are  not  free,  and  that  our 
liberty  is  infiinged  and  destroyed.  How  can  we  be  free  in  our 
volitions  and  actions,  it  is  asked,  if  God  make  us  to  will  and  to  do 
those  actions  ? 


354  GOD  THE   AUTHOR  OF 

The  answer  to  this  objection  depends  on  what  we  mean  by 
freedom  or  hberty.  If  we  mean  by  freedom  of  action,  willing- 
ness, and  by  a  free  action  a  voluntary  action  ;  in  this  sense,  we 
may  be  entirely  free,  though  our  actions,  internal  or  external,  be 
caused  by  the  Deity.  According  to  scripture,  God  does  cause  in 
us  a  willing  mind.  Psalm  110:  3,  "  Thy  people  shall  be  willing 
in  the  day  of  thy  power."  This  willing  mind  is  free  action. 
Therefore  the  divine  operation  does  not  destroy  free  action,  but 
causes  and  secures  it  ;  and  the  more  efficaciously  it  causes  the 
willing  mind  or  volition,  the  more  certainly  and  infallibly  is  our 
freedom  established.  To  imagine  that  if  God  cause  our  volitions, 
which  are  free  acts,  we  are  not  free,  is  just  as  absurd  as  to  ima- 
gine that  if  God  make  a  wall  white  it  is  certainly  not  white  but 
black  ;  or  to  imagine  that  if  God  create  a  man  he  certainly  is  not 
a  man,  but  a  block. 

I  am  very  sensible  that  the  idea  and  definition  of  free  action, 
now  given,  will  be  disputed  by  some.  They  will  tell  us  a  voli- 
tion is  not  a  free  action,  merely  because  it  is  a  volition  ;  but  that 
in  order  to  be  free  it  must  be  self-determinate  and  self-originated, 
and  that  the  subject  of  the  volition,  in  becoming  the  subject  of  it, 
must  be  exempted  from  all  extrinsic  causality,  and  produce  the 
volition  by  his  own  efficiency  only.  But  this  immediately  plunges 
us  into  all  the  absurdities  mentioned  under  the  former  head  of 
action  and  agency.     These  absurdities  are, 

(1)  That  either  every  free  volition  is  the  effect  of  an  infinite 
series  of  volitions  causing  each  other,  and  therefore  every  man 
must  have  existed  from  eternity,  else  he  could  not  have  been  the 
subject  of  such  an  infinite  series  ;  or  every  free  volition  is  the  ef- 
fect of  a  series  of  volitions  extending  to  the  beginning  of  his  exis- 
tence, or  to  his  first  volition  at  least.  But  as  this  first  volition 
cannot  be  the  effect  of  a  preceding  volition,  it  cannot  according  to 
the  idea  of  freedom  now  under  consideration,  be  free.  And  this 
first  volition  which  is  not  determined  by  the  man  who  is  the  sub- 
ject of  it,  determines  all  the  rest  of  the  series  ;  so  that  all  the  rest 
are  really  determined  by  the  same  cause  which  determines  the 
first,  and  therefore  are  none  of  them  self-determinate,  and  none 
of  them  free  in  the  sense  now  under  consideration. 

(2)  As  all  the  series  of  volitions  preceding  the  present  one  or 
any  supposed  one  of  the  series,  are  really  not  distinct  from  the 
supposed  one,  but  the  same  with  it,  it  follows  that  another  ab- 
surdity attending  the  idea  of  liberty  now  opposed  is  this :  that 
one  and  the  same  thing  is  supposed  to  be  distinct  from  itself  and  • 
the  cause  of  itself.  And  another  is,  that  all  our  free  volitions  are 
on  this  supposition  without  motive  or  design,  and  merely  by 


ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS  AND  ACTIONS.  355 

chance.  So  the  idea  that  a  volition  in  order  to  be  free,  must  be 
self-determinate  is  replete  with  absurdity,  and  is  incapable  of  vin- 
dication ;  it  must  therefore  be  relinquished.  The  advocates  of 
it,  may  be,  as  they  have  been,  challeni^ed  to  vindicate  and  clear  it 
of  the  palpable  absurdities  and  contradictions  which  attend  it. 

Freedom  or  liberty  is  an  exemption  from  something,  some  in- 
cumbrance, obstruction,  or  compelling  power.  The  only  ques- 
tion is,  what  that  is  from  which  liberty,  mental  liberty  is  an  ex- 
emption ?  As  I  have  already  observed,  some  hold  that  it  is  an 
exemption  from  all  extrinsic  influence  or  causality,  and  therefore 
the  person  who  is  free,  causes  his  own  actions  external  and  inter- 
nal. I  need  not  further  enlarge  on  this  idea  of  liberty  as  I  have 
already  made  some  observations  upon  it.  But  if  those  who  hold 
that  liberty  implies  an  exemption  from  all  extrinsic  causality,  do 
not  mean  that  a  free  action  is  caused  by  ourselves,  they  must 
mean  that  it  is  caused  by  nothing,  or  has  no  cause.  Every  volition 
has  a  cause,  or  has  no  cause.  If  it  have  a  cause,  that  cause  is 
either  extrinsic  to  the  person  whose  volition  it  is,  or  he  himself  is 
the  cause  of  it.  Those  w'ho  oppose  us  on  this  subject — utterly 
deny  that  it  is  the  effect  of  an  extrinsic  cause.  And  that  it  is 
not  the  effect  of  the  person  himself  whose  volition  it  is,  I  have 
endeavored  to  show  by  the  absurdities  and  contradictions  attend- 
ing that  supposition  ;  and  how  far  this  confutation  is  valid,  I  sub- 
mit to  all  candid  judges,  and  even  challenge  our  opponents  to 
show  the  invalidity  of  it.  If  it  be  valid,  then  it  remains  that  vo- 
lition has  no  cause  at  all,  but  springs  up  out  of  nothing,  by  mere 
chance.  Whoever  espouses  this  idea  of  liberty,  must  reject  all 
arguing  of  causes  from  effects,  and  particularly  must  reject  the 
proof  ofthe  existence  of  a  first  cause,  from  the  existence  of  the 
visible  world,  its  inhabitants,  or  any  events  which  have  taken 
place,  or  may  take  place  in  it. 

Besides,  what  desirable  freedom  is  there  in  having  volitions 
take  place  in  our  minds  by  mere  cliance  ?  Is  there  a  greater  or 
a  more  desirable  freedom  in  this,  than  in  having  those  same  voli- 
tions take  place  by  the  influence  of  some  extrinsic  and  wise 
cause  ?  We  should  in  the  former  case,  no  more  be  the  cause  of, 
and  have  no  more  control  over  them  than  in  the  latter.  Yet  this 
is  the  only  freedom  which  there  can  be,  if  freedom  be  inconsis- 
tent with  extrinsic  influence  and  cafisality.  For  beside  the  ab- 
surdities before  observed  to  be  necessarily  implied  in  causing  our 
ovrn  internal  acts,  if  it  should  be  allowed  that  we  do  cause  them, 
it  must  also  be  allowed  that  we  cause  them  by  mere  chance. 
For  if  we  cause  them  according  to  any  established  order,  under 
any    superior  influence,  and  in  any  definite  way  and  manner, 


356  GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF 

there  would  be  a  limitation  of  our  wills  and  of  their  acts,  and 
consequently  there  would  be  no  liberty  to  either  side,  no  liberty 
to  act  or  not  act ;  which  all  hold  who  hold  that  extrinsic  causal- 
ity is  inconsistent  with  liberty.  If  we  cause  our  own  volitions, 
we  cause  them  either  according  to  a  certain  established  order,  or 
by  mere  chance.  If  we  cause  them  according  to  any  established 
order,  that  order  was  doubtless  estabiislied  by  some  superior  be- 
ing, and  of  course  that  superior  being  limits,  restrains,  and  really 
causes  our  volitions  to  be  what  they  are,  and  thus  this  hypothesis 
necessarily  leads  to  an  extrinsic  cause  of  all  our  volitions.  If  on 
the  other  hand  we  cause  them  ourselves,  by  mere  chance,  then 
the  act  or  acts  by  which  we  cause  them  take  place  by  mere 
chance,  and  consequently  the  acts  caused  and  the  whole  of  our 
volitions,  take  place  by  mere  chance.  If  the  cause  of  the  act 
be  accidental,  the  efTect  too  is  accidental.  And  what  a  glorious 
state  of  liberty  is  this  !  To  be  driven,  like  a  feather  in  the 
wind,  or  rather  like  one  of  Epicurus'  atoms  in  the  infinite  void  ! 

The  true  idea  of  moral  liberty,  therefore,  cannot  be  an  ex- 
emption from  all  extrinsic  causality  of  our  actions  ;  but  it  consists 
in  exemption  from  all  involuntary  compulsion  and  restraint ;  that 
is,  from  that  compulsion  and  restraint  to  which  the  will  is,  or  may 
be  opposed.  But  the  will  is  not,  nor  can  be  opposed  to  itself,  or 
to  its  own  acts.  It  cannot  will,  and  not  will  at  the  same  time,  and 
in  the  same  respect.  It  cannot  have  a  volition,  and  not  have  it. 
Therefore  every  volition  is  in  its  own  nature  necessarily  exemp- 
ted from  involuntary  compulsion  and  restraint,  and  of  course  it  is, 
and  must  be  free. 

Tliis  idea  of  liberty  is  directly  opposed  to  that  which  places  it 
in  self-determination,  and  contingence  or  chance  ;  nor  is  there 
any  medium  between  these  two.  They  who  arc  convinced  that 
the  latter  is  absurd  and  indefensible,  must  receive  the  former  ;  as 
they  who  do  not  receive  the  former,  do,  and  must  receive  the 
latter. 

Some  profess  to  believe  both  human  liberty,  and  the  doctrine 
of  divine  universal  influence  taught  in  our  text.  At  the  same 
time  they  profess  not  to  be  able  to  reconcile  them,  or  see  their 
mutual  consistency.  But  the  truth  is,  that  if  human  liberty  con- 
sists in  exemption  from  extrinsic  influence  and  causality,  it  is  im- 
possible to  reconcile  it  with  the  divine  agency  working  in  us  both 
to  will  and  to  do  ;  and  to  believe  both  this  influence,  and  this 
kind  of  liberty,  is  to  believe  both  parts  of  a  direct  contradiction. 

But  if  liberty  consist  in  an  exemption  from  that  compulsion  to 
which  will  is  or  may  be  opposed,  there  is  not  the  least  inconsis- 
tency, between  that  and  a  divine  causation  of  our  volitions.     Vo- 


ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS  AND  ACTIONS.  357 

litions  are  incapable  of  compulsion.  A  compelled  volition,  would 
be  an  involuntary  volition,  which  is  a  contradiction.  Every  voli- 
tion therefore  is  necessarily  free,  however  the  volition  came  into 
existence,  whether  by  a  divine  influence,  or  in  whatever  way. 
And  the  whole  difficulty  of  reconciling  human  liberty  with  di- 
vine efficacious  influence,  and  also  with  the  divine  decrees,  de- 
pends upon  the  definition  which  we  give  of  human  liberty.  In- 
deed upon  this  depends  the  so  great,  and  so  long  agitated  dispute 
concerning  human  liberty.  Let  human  liberty  be  defined,  and 
the  whole  dispute  will  soon  be  settled.  If  it  be  defined  to  con- 
sist in  an  exemption  from  all  extrinsic  influence  and  causality,  the 
advocates  for  this  liberty  may  soon  be  compelled,  it  is  conceived, 
to  own  that  we  are  not  free.  If  it  be  defined  to  consist  in  ex- 
emption from  involuntary  compulsion  and  restraint,  all  will  allow 
that  in  this  sense  we  are  free. 

3.  It  is  objected  that  if  God  work  in  us  both  to  will  and  to  do, 
and  we  be  dependent  on  his  aid  for  all  moral  good,  ive  are  not 
accountable,  and  are  not  rewardable,  or  punishable  for  any  of  our 
conduct.  This  objection  is  really  one,  though  it  seems  to  divide 
itself  into  two.  To  be  accountable,  and  to  be  rewardable  or  pun- 
ishable as  our  conduct  may  be,  is  the  same  thing.  Now  it  is 
pleaded  that  we  are  not  rewardable  or  punishable  for  any  of  our 
actions  external  or  internal,  unless  we  be  the  efficient  cause  of 
them.  But  that  we  should  be  the  efficient  cause  of  our  own  vo- 
litions is  replete  with  absurdity,  as  I  have  already  endeavored  to 
show.  This  therefore  is  not  necessary  to  reward  or  punishment. 
An  absurdity  or  impossibility  cannot  be  necessary  to  these.  Nor 
is  it  necessary  to  either  of  these,  that  we  act  by  chance  ;  and  that 
it  be  previously  uncertain  what  our  actions  shall  be.  A  man  may 
be  rewardable  for  one  action,  and  punishable  for  another,  though 
in  both  instances  it  was  previously  certain  in  reality,  and  certainly 
known  too,  what  his  actions  would  be.  It  is  granted  on  all  hands, 
that  God  certainly  foreknows  all  events  and  all  human  actions,  and 
therefore  they  are  both  certain  and  known  to  be  so,  yet  it  is  not 
pretended  that  on  this  account  those  actions  are  neither  reward- 
able  nor  punishable. 

This  objection  is  built  oh  a  wrong  idea  of  what  constitutes  an 
action  rewardable,  or  punishable,  viz.  this :  that  the  subject  of 
that  action  is  the  efficient  cause  of  it.  No  intelligent  being, 
either  God  or  creature,  is  the  efficient  cause  of  his  own  mejital  ac- 
tions. If  God  were  the  efficient  cause  of  his  own  volitions,  he 
would  be  mutable.  To  effect  a  volition  is  to  excite  it,  and  the 
volition  in  this  case  is  a  creature.  But  a  creature  necessarily  be- 
gins its  existence  in  time,  and  cannot  have  existed  from  eternity. 

Vol.  II.  31 


358  GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF 

Therefore  if  God  have  effected  any  volition  in  his  own  mind,  that 
volition  has  had  its  beginning  in  time,  and  therefore  implies  a 
change  in  God. 

Neither,  for  reaso'.is  already  given  can  any  creature  be  the  ef- 
ficient cause  of  volitions  in  himself.  Therefore  there  is  no  such 
thing  in  nature,  as  an  intelligent  mind  efficiently  causing  voli- 
tions in  itself.  This  then  cannot  be  the  ground  of  reward  or  pun- 
ishment. 

The  true  ground  of  these,  seems  to  be  this,  that  a  rational  volun- 
tary action  tends  to  good,  or  to  evil.  When  a  man  in  the  exercise 
of  his  reason,  voluntarily  and  designedly  performs  an  action  which 
tends  in  its  nature  to  the  general  good,  or  to  good  on  the  whole, 
and  with  a  design  to  do  good,  he  is  rewardable.  And  on  the 
other  hand,  when  in  the  exercise  of  his  reason  he  voluntarily  per- 
forms an  action  whicii  tends,  and  which  he  knows,  or  might  know 
tends  to  the  general  detriment,  or  to  evil  on  the  whole,  he  is  pun- 
ishable. And  therefore  a  man  in  the  exercise  of  his  reason,  act- 
ing voluntarily  is  accountable  for  his  conduct ;  and  this  is  all  that  is 
necessary  to  accountableness.  It  is  right  and  reasonable,  that 
such  a  man  should  be  rewarded  or  punished  as  his  conduct  may 
be,  because  all  the  good  ends  of  reward  and  punishment  may 
be  obtained  in  such  a  case.  One  end  of  reward  in  many  cases 
is  to  encourage  the  man  rewarded  to  proceed  in  good  conduct. 
This  end  may  be  obtained  by  rewarding  the  man  I  have  descri- 
bed. Being  under  the  government  of  motives,  reward  will  natu- 
rally operate  as  a  motive,  and  persuade  him  to  continue  and  pro- 
ceed in  well  doing.  Another  end  is  to  encourage  others  to  do 
well  ;  and  reward  in  the  instance  now  described,  manifestly  has 
a  tendency  to  this.  The  ends  of  punishing  are  correspondent  to 
those  of  rewarding,  viz.  :  to  restrain  the  subject  of  the  punish- 
ment, or  others  from  evil  conduct.  And  I  need  not  observe  that 
punishment  in  the  case  before  described  naturally  subserves  both 
these  ends.  Therefore  there  is  no  foundation  to  say  that  unless 
a  man  be  the  efficient  cause  of  his  own  volitions,  there  is  no  rea- 
son or  propriety,  in  either  rewarding  or  punishing  him. 

Having  now  finished  what  I  proposed  from  this  text,  I  shall 
conclude  with  some  inferences. 

].  Hence  we  learn  the  extent  of  our  dependence  on  God. 
Some  suppose  we  are  dependent  for  our  creation  and  for  our  pre- 
servation, but  not  for  our  common  actions  ;  that  God  upholds 
our  being  and  our  faculties,  but  that  we  exercise  these  faculties 
of  ourselves,  without  any  other  divine  influence  than  what  is  im- 
plied in  his  upholding  us.  But  this  seems  to  be  contradicted  by 
the  text,  as  well  as  by  all  that  has  come  up  to  our  view  in  con- 


ALL  GOOD  VOLITIONS   AND   ACTIONS.  359 

sideling  the  doctrine  taught  by  it.  Our  text  and  its  doctrine 
teach  us,  that  we  are  dependent  on  a  divine  influence  for  every 
good  action,  external  or  internal,  as  well  as  for  the  preservation 
of  our  faculties.  Therefore  sinners  are  dependent  on  God  to  re- 
new and  sanctify  their  hearts  ;  and  saints  are  dependent  on  him, 
to  uphold,  strengthen  and  edify  them.  Nor  can  tliey  any  more 
make  progress  in  the  christian  life  without  the  influence  of  God, 
than  they  can  first  begin  this  life.  To  God,  therefore,  we  must 
all  look  for  grace  to  help  in  every  time  of  need. 

2.  We  see  that  it  is  no  ground  of  luonder,  that  the  sacred 
scriptures  teach  the  doctrine  of  the  new  birth ;  tliat  they  de- 
clare in  peremptory  terms,  "  Except  a  man  be  born  again,  he 
cannot  see  the  kingdom  of  heaven  ;"  and  "  except  we  be  conver- 
ted, and  become  as  little  children,  we  cannot  enter  into  the  king- 
dom of  God." 

.3.  Hence  we  see  how  foolish,  and  stupid  they  are,  who  live 
at  ease  without  having  experienced  the  new  birth.  To  do  this 
is  to  be  at  ease  in  a  state  of  the  most  imminent  danger,  exposed 
at  any  moment  to  the  endless  wrath  of  God. 

4.  Hence  we  infer,  that  if  any  man  be  not  a  real  christian  it 
is  wholly  his  own  fault,  and  that  he  is  entirely  and  solely  to  be 
blamed  ibr  it.  If  we  be  free  and  accountable  creatures,  if  we 
be  justly  blamable  for  all  tliose  voluntary  actions,  both  external 
and  internal  which  we  perform  in  the  possession  and  exer- 
cise of  our  reason,  and  which  tend  not  to  the  general  good  ; 
then  it  is  wholly  a  man's  own  f\iult,  that  he  lives  in  alienation 
from  God,  and  in  impenitence  and  unbelief.  And  although  many, 
on  the  ground  of  their  inability  to  repent  and  believe,  may,  in 
their  own  apprehensions,  excuse  themselves  for  living  in  this 
state,  yet  in  reality  they  are  utterly  inexcusable  ;  as  inexcusable 
as  the  drunkard  in  his  intemperance  ;  as  the  indolent  in  his  idle- 
ness ;  or  as  the  malicious  in  his  revenge. 

Therefore  let  the  wicked,  the  unconverted,  the  unregenerate, 
in  view  of  this  their  inexcusable  sinfulness,  humble  themselves 
before  God  in  deep  abasement ;  let  them  repent  of  this  their  wick- 
edness, and  fly  to  the  blood  of  the  atonement,  and  for  the  sake  of 
that  pray  God  that  all  the  wicked  thoughts  and  afl^ectionsof  their 
hearts,  and  the  wicked  fruits  thereof  in  their  lives  may  be  forgiv- 
en them. 

5.  It  is  solely  the  fault  of  christians  that  they  make  so  little 
proficiency  in  the  christian  life.  It  is  common  for  christians  to 
complain  that  they  have  so  little  grace  in  exercise,  that  they  are 
so  dead,  dull  and  lifeless,  and  that  they  have  so  little  evidence 
from  sanctification,  of  their  christian  character  and  privileges. 


360  GOD  THE  AUTHOR  OF  ALL  GOOD,  ETC. 

Of  these  things  they  often  complain,  not  in  the  humble  strains  of 
real  repentance,  but  sometimes  with  a  degree  of  peevishness,  and 
oftener  in  a  way  of  self-justification,  pleading  that  they  have  not 
the  influences  of  the  spirit  and  a  sufficiency  of  the  grace  of  God,  as 
an  apology  for  their  unfruitfulness.  But  if  our  doctrine  be  true, 
all  this  is  utterly  wrong.  It  is  adding  sin  to  sin.  Therefore  instead 
of  this  vain  splf-justification,  and  instead  of  this  complaining  of 
God  for  withholding  his  grace  and  spirit,  let  us  sincerely  confess 
our  own  fault  to  God,  be  deeply  humbled  under  a  sense  of  it,  and 
forgetting  those  things  which  are  behind  and  reaching  forth  to 
those  which  are  before,  let  us  press  toward  the  mark  for  the  prize 
of  the  high  calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  Let  us  be 
faithful  unto  death,  and  then  we  shall  receive  a  crown  of  life. 


SERMON   XXIII 


THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID  THROUGH  FAITH.* 

Romans  3:  31. — Do  wc  then  make  void  the  laiv  through  failh '?      God  forbid  : 
yea  we  establish  Hie  law. 

Since  God  created  man  he  has  been  pleased  to  treat  with  him 
in  two  several  ways,  whieh  are  called  covenants.  These  cove- 
nants are  distinguished  according  to  their  order,  as  the  first  and 
the  second  covenant,  or  the  old  covenant  and  the  new  ;  accord- 
ing to  their  different  natures,  as  the  covenant  of  works  and  the 
covenant  of  grace ;  and  by  the  apostle  in  the  context  as  the  law 
of  works  and  law  of  faith  ;  or,  as  in  our  text  itself,  they  are  denoted 
simply  by  the  words  "  law  "  and  "  faith." 

In  each  of  these  ways  of  treating  with  man,  God  has  proposed 
certain  terms  or  conditions,  upon  the  fulfilment  of  which  on  man's 
part,  he  might  expect  to  secure  the  divine  favor  both  here  and 
hereafter.  In  the  former  of  these  covenants  or  ways  of  God's  treat- 
ing with  man,  the  terms  were  perfect  obedience  to  the  divine  law. 
He  that  should  continue  in  all  things  written  in  the  book  of  the 
law  to  do  them,  should  live  in  them  ;  but  whosoever  should  fail 
in  any  the  least  of  these,  should  be  accursed.  The  terms  of  the 
other  covenant  are  very  different.  For  now  God  does  not  re- 
quire a  perfect  obedience  as  the  ground  of  our  acceptance  with 
him.  Perfect  obedience,  perfect  conformity  to  the  law  of  God 
is  indeed,  now,  as  ever,  the  duty  of  all  men.  It  is  as  much  our 
duty  now  under  the  second  covenant  to  observe  the  law  perfectly 
as  a  rule  of  life,  as  ever  it  was  under  the  first  covenant ;  and 
hence  the  command  of  our  Lord  :  "  Be  ye  therefore  perfect,  even 
as  your  father  which  is  in  heaven  is  perfect."  Yet  notwithstand- 
ing it  is  thus  our  absolute  duty  to  keep  the  whole  law  as  a  rule  of 
life,  we  are  not  required  to  keep  it  as  a  way  of  securing  God's 
favor,  and  obtaining  final  salvation.  All  that  God  requires  of  us 
now,  in  order  to  secure  his  friendship  and  our  own  safety,  is  that  we 
repent  of  our  sins,  and  believe  and  accept  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
as  our  mediator  and  Savior.     These  are  the  two  ways  of  accept- 

*  First  preached  in  1768. 
31* 


362  THE   LAW  NOT  MADE   VOID 

ance  and  justification  in  the  sight  of  God,  and  these  are  the  dif- 
ferent terms  of  each. 

Now  that  we,  and  all  men  since  the  fall  are  justified  and  ac- 
cepted on  the  last  of  these  footings,  viz.  of  faith  in  the  Lord  Je- 
sus Christ,  and  not  on  the  former  one  of  the  law  and  perfect  obe- 
dience to  it,  is  what  the  apostle  abundantly  asserts  and  proves  in 
the  former  part  of  this  epistle.  Thus  in  the  20th  verse  of  the 
context  he  says,  "  Therefore  by  the  deeds  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh 
be  justified  in  his  sight ;"  and  again  in  the  28th  verse,  "  There- 
fore we  conclude  that  a  man  is  justified  by  faith  without  the  deeds 
of  the  law."  This  being  the  case  then,  that  we  are  not  accepted, 
and  justified  on  the  footing  of  the  law  or  by  the  deeds  of  the  law, 
but  entirely  on  the  footing  of  faith  in  a  redeemer,  the  question 
naturally  arises  whether,  upon  this  plan  of  justification  by  faith, 
the  law  was  not  set  aside  and  made  void,  of  none  effect  ?  This 
question  the  apostle  starts  in  our  text :  "  Do  we  then  make  void 
the  law  through  faith  ?"  And  the  answer  to  it  also  we  have  in 
the  same  text:  '-'God  forbid:  yea  we  establish  the  law." 

To  make  void  the  law,  as  the  phrase  is  here  used,  means  to  set 
it  aside  and  to  have  no  regard  to  it,  to  treat  it  as  being  repealed, 
and  thus  as  a  mere  dead  letter.  For  as  the  apostle  had  abun- 
dantly declared  that  we  are  not  justified  by  the  works  of  law, 
but  by  faith  without  these  works,  it  might  naturally  seem  to  fol- 
low that  the  law  was  now  made  void,  and  that  no  regard  was  to 
be  had  to  it,  any  more  than  to  any  other  dead  letter.  But  this 
consequence  he  most  directly  denies  and  rejects.  We  by  no 
means,  says  he,  make  void  the  law  through  faith  ;  so  far  from 
this  is  the  fact,  that  on  the  other  hand  we  establish  it.  By 
making  void  the  law  through  faith  he  means  evidently,  as  already 
hinted,  making  it  void  by  this  new  plan  of  justification  by  faith 
in  Christ,  and  not  barely  by  the  simple  act  of  faith.  He  here 
uses  the  word  faith  in  opposition  to  the  law.  And  as  by  "  the 
law  "  he  means  the  moral  law  which  was  the  way  of  acceptance 
and  justification  under  the  first  covenant ;  so  by  "  faith"  he  in- 
tends not  merely  the  simple  act  of  believing,  but  in  general  the 
way  and  method  of  justification  and  salvation  under  the  second 
covenant. 

Let  us  then  inquire  wherein  it  appears,  that  by  this  new  way 
of  acceptance  and  justification  by  faith,  the  law  is  indeed  not  nulli- 
fied and  set  aside,  but  is  fully  kept  up  and  sustained  in  its  true 
spirit  and  import,  and  not  only  so,  but  is  even  more  firmly  estab- 
lished than  if  this  new  method  of  justification  had  never  been 
adopted.  In  attempting  this,  two  points  are  before  us :  I.  To 
inquire  wherein  it  appears  that  in  the  gospel  mode  of  justification 


THROUGH  FAITH.  363 

by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law,  the  law  is  not  set  aside 
and  made  void  ;  and  2.  Wherein  it  appears  that  the  law,  in  this 
mode  of  justification,  is  further  and  more  effectually  established 
than  if  this  way  had  never  been  adopted.  We  proceed  to  con- 
sider each  of  these  in  its  order. 

I.  JVherein  does  it  appear  that  in  the  gospel  mode  of  justifi- 
cation bij  faith,  icithout  the  deeds  of  the  law,  the  law  is  not  set 
aside  and  made  void  1 

Whenever  a  law  is  repealed,  set  aside,  or  made  void,  no  fur- 
ther regard  is  had  to  it ;  for  if  any  regard  or  respect  is  had  to  it, 
certainly  it  is  not  entirely  set  aside  and  made  void.  So  far  as 
any  respect  is  had  to  it  by  executive  authority,  so  far  it  is  unre- 
pealed and  remains  in  force.  And  if  the  executive  authority  do 
in  any  instance  so  keep  in  view  any  law,  as  never  to  allow  the 
least  violation  of  it  to  pass  with  impunity,  and  as  always  to  see 
that  it  be  maintained  in  force  according  to  its  true  spirit  and  im- 
port; then  in  such  a  case,  that  law  can  in  no  sense  be  said  to  be 
set  aside  or  made  void.  Now  all  this,  I  trust,  upon  examina- 
tion, we  shall  find  true  with  regard  to  the  law  of  God  in  the  af- 
fair of  justification  by  faith  in  Christ. 

It  is  manifest  that  God,  who  executes  his  own  law,  has  not  been 
regardless  of  it  in  this  new  plan  of  pardon  and  salvation,  inasmuch 
as  he  has  caused  an  atonement  to  be  made  for  the  breaches  and 
violations  of  it.  This  most  clearly  proves  that  the  law  is  not  set 
aside  and  made  void.  It  would  be  a  most  absurd  thing  to  make 
an  atonement  for  the  violations  of  a  law,  when  that  law  itself 
was  made  void,  and  really  had  no  existence.  What  need  could 
there  be  of  an  atonement  for  the  violations  of  such  a  law  ?  The 
breaches  of  a  law  which  has  no  existence,  are  the  breaches  of 
nothing  ;  that  is,  they  are  no  breaches  of  law  at  all ;  for  "  When 
there  is  no  law  there  is  no  transgression."  But  to  require  an 
atonement  when  there  is  no  transgression  to  be  atoned  for,  can 
never  consist  with  the  justice  and  purity  of  God.  So  that  this  plan 
of  justification  and  salvation  through  a  redeemer,  does  not  suppose 
that  the  law  is  made  null  and  void  ;  but  quite  contrarily  is  found- 
ed entirely  upon  the  real  existence  and  continued  force  and  obli- 
gation of  the  law,  and  is  so  far  from  making  the  law  void,  that  its 
very  existence  depends  upon  the  existence  of  the  law  itself. 

Again,  to  make  an  atonement  for  the  breaches  of  the  law  is 
doing  no  small  honor  to  the  law,  inasmuch  as  it  is  a  public  de- 
claration, (and  that  in  a  way  of  facts,)  of  its  reasonableness, 
equity  and  goodness,  and  so  of  its  just  obligatory  force.  For 
wliat  is  the  meaning  of  an  atonement  made  for  the  breaches  of 
any  law,  if  it  be  not  this ;  that  the  law  is  just,  equitable  and 


864  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

good,  and  that  he  that  breaks  it  justly  deserves  to  fall  under  its 
penalty,  and  that  it  is  only  out  of  mere  mercy  that  this  atonement 
is  accepted  instead  of  his  punishment  ?  This  was  the  true  and 
plain  and  intended  meaning  of  the  atonement  made  for  the  trans- 
gressions of  the  law  committed  by  sinners. 

But  what  shall  we  think  of  all  these  practical  declarations,  of 
all  this  show,  as  if  the  law  was  not  only  then  in  force,  but  also 
as  if  it  was  a  most  good  and  equitable  law,  entirely  worthy  to  be 
obeyed  in  every  article  by  man,  and  to  be  executed  in  every  one 
of  its  penalties  by  God,  if  at  the  same  time  that  law  was  in  fact 
such  an  evil  and  unjust  one  that  God  had  been  obliged  to  re- 
peal it,  and  set  it  aside  as  void  ?  For  if  the  law  was  repealed 
and  made  void  at  all,  it  was  doubtless  for  some  reason.  But  what 
reason  could  there  be  for  repealing  it,  if  it  was  in  all  respects  an 
equitable  and  good  law  ?  It  is  manifest  there  could  be  none. 
Therefore  if  the  law  was  at  all  repealed  and  made  void,  it  undoubt- 
edly was  because  it  was  at  least  in  some  respects  evil,  severe  and 
unmerciful.  But  that  God  should  require  an  atonement,  and  no 
less  a  one  than  the  death  of  his  own  Son  for  the  breaches  of 
such  a  law,  and  make  so  public  a  manifestation  of  its  goodness  ; 
and  that  after  he  himself  had  nullified  it  as  bad,  is  a  conception 
of  the  Deity  the  most  gross  and  impious  that  the  human  mind  is 
capable  of  framing.  Yet  such  impious  consequences  will  follow 
if  the  law  was  set  aside  in  order  that  the  present  scheme  of  sal- 
vation might  take  its  place  ;  that  is,  if  the  law  be  made  void  by 
faith. 

But  perhaps  it  may  be  objected,  that  what  we  have  hitherto 
urged,  supposes  that  the  law  was  repealed  antecedently  to  the 
atonement's  being  made  ;  whereas  in  truth,  it  was  repealed  and 
made  void  only  afterwards,  and  in  consideration  of  the  atonement's 
having  been  n\ade. 

To  this  I  would  observe,  that  although  it  would  seem  most 
natural  to  suppose,  that  if  the  law  was  at  all  repealed  in  order  to 
jnake  way  for  the  plan  of  salvation  by  faith  in  Christ,  it  would  be 
done  before  that  plan  was  entered  upon,  and  so  before  the  atone- 
ment was  made  ;  yet  I  am  wilHng  to  allow  that  the  law  was  not 
repealed  but  upon  the  supposition  of  the  atonement's  being  al- 
ready made.  Now  upon  this  supposition,  either  the  law  was 
made  void  without  the  consideration  of  anything  done  in  the 
atonement  as  a  motive  to  excite  God  to  repeal  it,  or  ivith  some 
such  motive  on  account  of  wiiich  he  was  pleased  to  set  it  aside 
and  make  it  void.  Either  the  atonement  made  by  Christ,  did  in 
some  sense  prepare  the  way,  for  the  repeal  and  nullifying  of  the 
law  or  it  did  not. 


THROUGH  FAITH.  365 

If  there  was  nothing  done  in  the  atonement  with  this  view, 
and  wliich  tended  to  this  end,  and  if  the  law.  was  not  repealed 
upon  this  account,  then  there  is  no  kind  of  difference  as  to  the 
consequences  before  mentioned  whether  the  law  was  repealed  be- 
fore or  after  the  atonement.  For  what  reason  could  there  be  for 
making  an  atonement  for  the  breaches  of  a  law,  which  God 
himself  knew  was  so  evil  that  he  must  ere  long  repeal  it,  and 
make  it  void  ?  What  difference  can  be  pointed  out  between 
making  an  atonement  for  the  breaches  of  such  a  law,  and  one 
already  repealed  ?     I  think  it  is  nianifest  there  can  be  none. 

But  if  we  take  the  other  supposition,  viz.  that  the  law  was 
not  only  repealed  after  the  atonement  was  made  or  conceived  to 
be  made,  but  also  on  account  of  the  atonement  itself,  or  some- 
thing done  in  it,  in  this  case  I  beg  we  may  carefully  examine  this 
our  sup[)osition,  and  perhaps,  in  the  result,  we  shall  find  it  no 
nearer  the  truth  than  the  former. 

I  ask  then,  is  it  not  something  new  and  strange  that  an  atone- 
ment should  be  made  in  order  to  procure  the  repeal  of  the  law  ? 
On  this  supposition  it  seems  the  law  was  to  be  repealed  and  set 
aside,  but  that  this  was  to  be  done  only  provided  the  law  should 
be  satisfied.  But  such  a  setting  aside  of  a  law  as  this  is  no  set- 
ting of  it  aside  at  all.  Besides,  if  the  law  is  set  aside  and  made 
void  at  all,  so  as  not  to  be  kept  up  in  its  true  spirit  and  import, 
however  it  may  be  in  consideration  of  the  atonement,  yet  as  the 
atonement  was  introduced  and  brought  about,  only  as  a  means  in 
order  to  this  end,  and  as  the  end  is  always  in  view  and  is  pro- 
posed before  the  means,  so  there  must  have  been  some  reason 
antecedent  to  the  consideration  of  the  atonement,  why  God  pro- 
posed at  first  to  make  void  his  law.  But  what  reason  could  this 
be,  unless  that  it  was  an  evil  law,  and  at  least  in  some  respects, 
not  fit  to  be  executed  ?  No  other  reason  is  conceivable.  There- 
fore the  law  of  God,  upon  this  supposition,  was  originally  evil, 
unjust  and  cruel  ;  and  upon  this  account  it  was  that  God  pro- 
posed to  repeal  it,  and  make  it  void.  Yet  although  this  was  the 
case,  God  could  not  find  it  in  his  heart  to  do  it,  till  Jesus  Christ 
came  into  the  world  and  lived  a  life  of  suffering,  and  died  upon 
the  cross,  to  excite,  and  persuade  him  to  do  it.  Then,  and  not 
till  then,  God  found  himself  willing  to  make  void  his  law. 

But  if  this  was  really  the  case,  that  the  divine  law  was  evil, 
and  over-rigorous,  and  unjust,  was  not  God  bound  of  himself  to 
make  it  void  ?  What  need  was  there  of  an  atonement  to  per- 
suade him  to  do  this  ?  On  the  other  hand  does  not  the  very  sup- 
position, that  God  required  an  atonement  to  be  made  ere  he 
would  consent  to  nullify  his  law,  when  it  was,  and  he  knew  it  to 


366  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE   VOID 

be  unjust  and  cruel,  and  such  as  he  was  obliged  lo  nullify  ; — does 
not  this  supposition  contain  a  charge  of  the  blackest  iniquity  and 
cruelty  against  the  ever  glorious  Jehovah  ?  Yet  such  is  the  ne- 
cessary consequence  of  supposing  that  the  law  is  made  void 
through  faith. 

Let  us  now  more  particularly  inquire  into  the  consistency  be- 
tween our  being  justified  by  faith  alone,  and  the  law's  being  strictly 
maintained  without  the  least  abatement.  The  reason  why  these 
two  things  seem  to  have  any  mutual  inconsistency,  is  that  in  the 
way  of  justification  and  salvation  by  faith  the  law  is  not  executed 
exactly  according  to  the  letter  of  it.  The  letter  of  the  law  is, 
"  In  the  day  thou  eatest  thereof,  thou  shalt  surely  die  ;"  and 
"the  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die."  Now  because  the  law  is 
not  executed  exactly  according  to  the  letter,  it  may  seem  to  some, 
whatever  ditiiculties  the  supposition  may  be  attended  with,  that 
it  must  be,  and  is  in  some  degree  at  least  abated,  and  made 
void. 

To  clear  off  this  objection,  and  show  that  it  is  unfounded,  is 
what  I  shall  next  attempt. 

There  is  doubtless  such  a  thing  as  a  law's  being  maintained 
and  kept  up  as  to  its  true  spirit  and  design,  although  it  be  not 
literally  executed.  Any  law  may  be  said  to  be  maintained  in  its 
true  spirit  and  design,  when  its  authority  either  to  restrain  from 
the  thing  forbidden  or  excite  to  the  thing  enjoined,  is  as  great  as 
it  ever  was.  But  the  authority  of  a  law  may  doubtless  thus  be 
maintained,  without  in  all  cases  an  exact  and  literal  execution  of 
it.  If  for  instance  a  law  made  by  a  prince  requires,  in  case  of 
its  violation,  that  the  offender  be  punished  with  a  certain  corpo- 
ral punishment,  yet  doubtless  this  same  offender  may  by  hum- 
bling himself  before  his  prince,  by  parting  with  his  property,  etc. 
make  such  satisfaction  as  will  be  as  much  to  the  honor  and  credit 
of  the  law,  and  which  will  as  effectually  support  its  authority,  as 
if  the  law  were  literally  executed  and  the  offender  corporally 
punished.  If  the  penalty  should  be  literally  inflicted,  it  would 
be  an  attestation  of  the  equity,  goodness  and  justly  binding  force 
of  the  law,  and  so  of  the  guilt  and  iniquity  of  its  violation.  But 
the  same  attestation  may  be  made  in  other  ways  besides  this  of  a 
literal  execution,  as  in  that  just  mentioned.  The  offender  by 
humbling  himself  before  his  prince,  and  paying  such  a  sum  of 
his  property  as  a  ransom  of  his  body,  may  give  as  great  an  attes- 
tation in  favor  of  the  law  and  of  its  just  obligatory  force,  and  so 
of  his  sense  of  his  own  guilt  and  iniquity  in  transgressing  it,  as 
could  be  given  by  its  literal  execution.  In  this  case  then  the  au- 
thority of  the  law,  and  its  influence  to  restrain  from  the  things 


TMROUtt  FAITH.  367 

forbidden,  and  to  excite  to  the  performance  of  those  enjoined,  are 
as  great  as  if  it  had  been  literally  executed  ;  and  so  it  cannot  be 
said  in  the  least  to  be  set  aside,  abated  or  made  void. 

If  this  law  were  set  aside  or  made  void  in  any  one  instance,  it 
would  be  an  encouragement  to  all  who  should  be  disposed  to  of- 
fend, to  hope  that  it  would  be  set  aside  in  their  case  also  ;  and 
thus  would  manifestly  bring  the  law  into  disgrace  and  contempt. 
It  would  soon  become  a  mere  pointless  weapon  ;  and  men  would 
be  very  careless  whether  they  observed  or  broke  it.  But  in  that 
instance  before  mentioned,  where  a  man  humbles,  and  acknow- 
ledges himself  guilty  before  the  prince,  and  justly  bound  by  the 
law,  and  offers  a  ransom  for  his  body,  the  authority  of  the  law  is 
sustained.  And  in  this  as  in  many  cases,  there  may  be  such  a 
ransom  and  such  satisfaction  given,  as  will  as  effectually  secure 
the  law  from  disgrace  and  contempt,  as  if  it  were  exactly  execu- 
ted according  to  the  letter. 

It  being  then  manifest  that  there  is  no  impossibility  in  the  na- 
ture of  things  in  omitting  the  literal  execution  of  a  law,  without 
at  all  setting  it  aside,  or  making  it  void,  even  in  the  case  where  it 
has  been  broken,  let  us  now  proceed  to  inquire  what  was  done 
witii  regard  to  the  divine  law  ;  w^hether  anything  proper  to  se- 
cure it  from  contempt,  and  support  its  authority. 

That  there  was  a  ransom  given,  that  there  was  a  price  paid, 
that  an  atonement  or  expiatory  sacrifice  was  offered  up,  that  a 
redemption,  a  propitiation  was  effected,  cannot  be  denied.  All 
the  doubt  then  must  be  about  the  sufficiency,  the  value  of  the 
ransom,  atonement  or  propitiation.  But  as  to  this,  the  sacred 
scriptures  give  abundant  testimony.  Thus  saith  God  the  Son  to 
the  Father,  "  I  have  glorified  thee  on  Uie  earth,  I  have  finished 
the  work  which  thou  gavest  me  to  do;"  and  again,  "After  this 
Jcsiis  knowing  that  all  things  were  now  accomplished,  saith  I 
thirst ;"  and  again,  "  When  Jesus  therefore  had  received  the  vin- 
egar, he  said,  it  is  finished."  The  original  in  these  texts,  various- 
ly translated  "  accomplished  "  and  "  finished,"  is  the  very  same, 
and  properly  signifies  "  completely  and  perfectly  finished,"  or 
"accomplished."  Our  Lord  says  that  he  had  completely  and 
j)erfectly  finished  the  work  which  the  Father  had  given  him  to 
do.  What  this  work  was  we  are  informed  in  the  context. 
"  Whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in 
his  blood,  to  declare  his  righteousness  for  the  remission  of  sins 
that  are  past,  through  the  forbearance  of  God  ;  to  declare,  I  say, 
at  this  time  his  righteousness,  that  he  might  be  just,  and  the  jus- 
tificr  of  him  which  believeth  in  Jesus."  Here  we  are  expressly 
told  that  God  set  forth  Jesus  Christ  his  son  to  be  a  propitiation 


368  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

to  declare  his  righteousness,  and  to  prepare  the  way,  and  lay  such 
a  foundation,  that  God  might  be  just  and  yet  the  justifier  of  him 
that  believeth  in  Jesus ;  that  is,  to  make  a  full  and  sufficient 
atonement  for  sinners.  Now  this  work  our  Lord  says,  he  has 
completely  and  perfectly  finished.  Therefore  it  is  manifest  that 
the  atonement  which  is  made  for  sinners,  is  complete,  perfect 
and  every  way  sufficient.  Besides,  how  often  in  the  scriptures  is 
Christ  called  God's  "  beloved  son  in  whom  he  is  well  pleased," 
"  his  dear  son,"  "  the  son  of  his  love,"  "  his  servant  whom  he 
hath  chosen,"  "  his  elect  in  whom  his  soul  is  delighted,"  etc. 
But  could  God  be  thus  pleased  with  his  Son,  thus  delighted  in 
his  servant,  if  that  son,  that  servant  had  not  finished  the  work  to 
which  he  had  sent  him  ? 

Again  we  may  argue  the  same  from  the  omnipotence  of  God. 
God  certainly  did  undertake  to  provide  an  atonement  sufficient 
to  secure  the  honor  of  his  law,  and  preserve  it  from  contempt. 
For  says  the  prophet  Isaiah,  "  the  Lord  is  well  pleased  for  his 
righteousness'  sake  ;  he  will  magnify  his  law  and  make  it  honor- 
able." But  if  God  in  the  atonement  which  he  has  provided  has 
not  secured  this  end,  it  necessarily  impeaches  iiis  omnipotence  if 
not  his  omniscience  also. 

From  these  various  considerations  I  think  it  is  evident  that 
there  is  an  abundant  atonement  made  for  the  breaches  of  God's 
law,  even  such  as  will  eftectually  support  its  honor  and  authority, 
and  therefore  that  the  law  is  no  more  abated,  or  made  void  by 
the  atonement,  than  it  would  have  been  by  the  literal  execution 
of  it. 

But  further,  not  only  is  the  law  not  made  void  by  the  atone- 
ment but  as  the  apostle  tells  us  in  our  text,  it  is  established.  "  Do 
we  then  make  void  the  law  through  faith?"  says  he.  "  God  for- 
bid ;  yea  we  establish  the  law."  He  rejects  the  very  supposition 
of  the  law's  being  made  void  through  faith,  or  which  is  the  same 
thing  through  the  atonement  and  the  way  of  salvation  by  it,  as 
the  greatest  absurdity,  as  it  in  reality  is.  What  can  be  a  greater 
absurdity  than  to  suppose  that  the  law  is  made  void  and  set  aside, 
when  not  one  of  its  violators  is  pardoned  without  deep  repen- 
tance and  full  atonement  ?  Would  it  be  absurd  to  suppose  that 
a  law  is  made  void  and  set  aside  by  executing  it  exactly  accord- 
ing to  its  letter,  and  after  that  dismissing  the  offender?  Equally 
so  is  it  to  suppose  that  it  is  made  void  by  pardoning  penitent  of- 
fenders when  complete  atonement  is  made.  The  very  notion  of 
an  atonement  is  inconsistent  with  the  notion  of  the  law's  being 
made  void,  as  much  so  as  the  exact,  literal  execution  of  it.  But 
as  was  observed,  not  only  does  the  apostle  reject  the  supposition 


THROUGH  FAITH.  369 

of  the  law's  being  made  void  by  faith,  but  on  the  contrary  express- 
ly declares  that  it  is  established  by  it.  This  certainly  is  the  case. 
Is  the  literal  execution  of  a  law,  an  establishing  of  its  authority  ? 
Is  it  a  practical  declaration  of  its  goodness  and  equity  ?  Does  it 
tend  to  create  a  respect  and  reverence  for  the  law,  to  secure  it 
from  contempt,  and  to  make  its  subjects  believe  that  it  is  indeed 
a  matter  of  importance  that  it  should  be  most  strictly  observed  ? 
Equally  so  docs  a  full  atonement.  This  as  etfectually,  and  in 
some  cases  more  effectually  secures  all  these  ends.  And  thus  it 
is  that  through  faith,  so  far  from  making  void  the  law,  we  neces- 
sarily establish  it. 

What  has  been  said  is  I  apprehend  sufficient  to  establish  the 
first  tiling  proposed  to  be  shown,  whicii  was,  tiiat  in  the  gos- 
pel way  of  justification  by  faith  without  the  deeds  of  the  law,  the 
law  is  not  made  void,  or  in  the  least  abated.  I  now  proceed  to 
the  next  proposed  topic,  which  was  to  inquire, 

II.  Jiherein  it  appears,  that  the  law,  in  this  way  of  justifi- 
cation, is  more  effectually  established,  than  it  would  have  been 
if  this  way  had  never  been  adopted. 

That  the  law  of  God  is  more  established  by  the  present  plan  of 
salvation,  than  it  would  have  been  if  even  all  mankind  had  per- 
ished according  to  the  letter  of  the  law,  will  be  plain,  I  think,  if 
we  consider  that  the  present  plan  of  salvation  is  wholly  founded 
upon  the  atonement  of  Christ.  This  atonement  is  the  foundation 
of  the  whole  gospel,  and  without  it  the  gospel  and  the  salvation  by 
it  would  never  have  taken  place.  Now  through  the  atonement  of 
Christ  more  honor  is  done  to  the  law,  and  consequently  the  law 
is  more  established,  than  if  the  law  had  been  literally  executed, 
and  all  mankind  had  been  condemned. 

Whatever  tends  most  to  the  honor  of  the  law,  tends  most  to 
establish  its  authority.  But  the  atonement  made  by  the  life  and 
death  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  a  greater  expression  of  honor 
to  the  law  of  God  than  would  have  been  offered  even  by  the  eter- 
nal damnation  of  all  mankind.  Their  eternal  damnation  would 
doubtless  be  a  very  manifest  and  full  testimony  of  God,  and  that 
in  the  sight  of  both  worlds,  that  he  esteemed  his  law  holy,  just, 
and  good  ;  that  he  esteemed  it  an  excellent  and  glorious  law,  and 
most  worthy  to  be  maintained  in  every  article.  Wiiat  else  but 
this  could  be  the  meaning  of  such  a  fact.  Can  we  suppose  that 
God  would  execute  the  threatenings  of  a  law  which  he  did  not 
view  in  this  light  ?  Surely  not ;  for  it  would  be  inconsistent  with 
his  glorious  purity.  Now  although  the  eternal  condemnation  of 
the  whole  human  race  for  the  breach  of  the  law,  would  be  a  most 
full  and  striking  testimony  of  God,  before  the  eyes  of  the  whole 
Vol.  II.  32 


370  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

universe,  in  favor  of  his  law  and  its  authority,  yet  the  atonement^ 
by  the  life  and  death  of  Christ,  is  a  testimony  in  its  favor  stili 
more  full  and  more  striking.  For  by  this  it  appears,  that  God  so 
much  regarded  his  law  and  set  so  great  a  value  and  esteem  upon 
it,  that  when  his  own  dearly  beloved  Son  stood  up  and  interposed 
in  favor  of  sinncre  who  had  broken  it,  rather  than  make  the  least 
abatement  of  its  claims,  he  poured  out  the  dregs  of  the  wine-cup 
of  his  wrath,  without  mixture  of  mercy,  even  upon  him. 

That  God  should  not  make  an  abatement  of  his  law  in  order 
to  spare  one  of  us  mortals  might  not  seem  strange.  "  For  what 
is  man,  that  is  a  worm,  and  the  son  of  man,  which  is  a  worm?" 
Nay,  further,  that  God  should  not  set  aside  his  law  in  order  to 
spare  any  of  the  human  race,  but  that  he  should  hold  them  bound 
by  it  to  suffer  the  punishment  therein  threatened  till  they  should 
pay  the  uttermost  farthing ;  neither  ought  this  to  seem  strange  and 
unaccountable.  And  if  he  had  provided  no  remedy,  but  had  suf- 
fered all  mankind  to  walk  in  the  ways  of  their  own  heart,  and  in 
the  sight  of  their  own  eyes,  till  they  had  filled  up  the  measure; 
of  their  iniquity,  and  if  he  had  then  condemned  them  to  the 
punishment  they  justly  deserved,  and  had  glorified  himself  in 
their  eternal  ruin  ;  even  all  this  would  have  been  no  just  matter 
of  astonishment.  For  of  what  profit  could  the  whole  human 
race  be  to  God  ;  and  what  would  he  lose  by  their  eternal  de- 
struction ?  God  stands  in  no  need  of  us,  or  any  of  our  services. 
He  wants  not  those  who  should  worship  him.  He  is  worshipped 
by  "  an  innumerable  company  of  angels."  "  The  chariots  of  the 
Lord,"  saith  the  psalmist,  "  are  twenty  thousand,  even  thousands 
of  angels  ;"  and  saith  the  prophet  Daniel,  "Thousand  thousand's 
minister  unto  him,  and  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand  stand 
before  him."  What  loss  then  could  it  have  been  to  Jehovah,  had 
none  of  mankind  been  brought  to  join  this  vast  assembly  ?  It 
is  said  in  the  Revelation  "  that  the  sealed  servants  of  our  God," 
(meaning  those  sealed  from  among  men)  were  in  all  144,000. 
But  what  are  these  to  the  innumerable  company  of  angels,  and 
the  thousand  thousands,  and  ten  thousand  times  ten  thousand, 
which  the  sacred  scriptures  mention  ? 

Now  if  the  whole  race  of  mortals  considered  in  themselves, 
are  of  so  small  worth  when  compared  with  the  angelic  hosts,  of 
how  much  smaller  worth  must  they  be  in  comparison  with  Jesus 
Christ  the  Son  of  God  ?  He  is  "  the  brightness  of  his  Father's  glo- 
ry and  the  express  image  of  his  person  ;"  "  who  being  in  the 
form  of  God,  thought  it  not  robbery  to  be  equal  with  God."  He  is 
God,  and  every  way  equal  with  God  the  Father  ;  for  he  is  one  with 
him.     As  then  God  the  Father  is  far  more  glorious,  nay  infinitely 


THROUGH  FAITH.  371 

more  glorious,  worthy  and  excellent  than  all  creatures  both  angels 
and  men,  so  also  is  God  the  Son.  All  nations,  yea  all  the  count- 
less millions  of  creation,  both  men  and  angels  united,  are  in 
comparison  with  him  as  a  drop  of  the  bucket,  and  are  counted 
as  the  dust  of  the  balance. 

Of  how  much  more  worth,  then,  must  his  sufferings  be  than 
those  of  all  creatures  together  ?  And  of  how  much  more  still 
than  those  of  the  human  race  alone  ?  It  is  true  his  sufferings 
were  not  eternal,  as  those  of  men  must  have  been  ;  yet  it  is  true 
also  that  he  suffered  the  full  punishment  due  to  sin.  He  suffered 
till  it  was  finislied,  till  the  work  of  atonement  was  completely  ac- 
complished, till  God's  wrath  was  appeased  and  his  law  satisfied. 
But  certainly  that  a  person  of  such  glory  and  dignity  has  suffered 
the  full  punishment  due  to  sin,  is  a  greater  honor  to  the  law,  and 
a  more  striking  testimony  in  favor  of  its  goodness,  than  if  the 
same  punishment  had  been  suffered  by  any  being  or  beings  infi- 
nitely inferior  in  glory  and  dignity. 

This  matter  may  be  illustrated  thus.  Suppose  a  criminal  of 
common  rank  in  the  kingdom  has  been  condemned  for  iniquitous 
practices,  to  suffer  a  certain  corporal  punishment.  The  prince 
and  heir-apparent,  however,  entertains  so  strong  an  affection  for 
him,  that  although  ho  fully  consents  to  the  justice  of  the  sentence, 
he  yet  cannot  bear  that  he  suffer  such  punishment  and  disgrace ; 
and  rather  than  either  he  should  thus  suffer,  or  the  law  by  which 
he  is  condemned  should  be  set  aside,  he  offers  himself  to  suffer 
the  full  punishment  due  to  the  law.  Now  although  the  judge 
may  rightly  determine,  that  as  he  is  a  person  of  vastly  superior 
dignity,  it  would  not  be  necessary  to  exact  of  him  the  same  de- 
gree or  duration  of  punishment ;  yet  as  he  suffers  the  full  punish- 
ment due  to  the  law,  will  any  one  deny  that  it  is  as  honorable  to 
the  law,  nay  much  more  honorable,  than  if  the  criminal  himself 
had  suffered  the  punishment  to  which  he  was  sentenced  ?  This 
illustration  is  indeed  far  from  perfectly  representing  the  thing  it 
is  brought  to  illustrate  ;  and  yet  I  apprehend,  it  in  some  measure 
points  out  to  us  how  much  more  honorable  to  the  law  of  God  it 
is,  that  Christ  has  died,  and  has  made  atonement  for  sin,  than 
if 'even  all  mankind  had  fallen  under  its  sentence  and  suffered  its 
penalty ;  and  thus  it  also  points  out  how  much  more  the  law  is 
established  through  faith,  than  it  would  have  been  by  an  exact  ex- 
ecution of  it  according  to  the  letter.  Having  thus  finished  the 
doctrinal  part  of  our  discourse,  the  way  is  prepared  to  make  some 
inferences  and  reflections.     And, 

1.  From  this  doctrine  we  may  infer  that  it  is  the  indispensa- 
ble duty  of  every  one  inviolably  to  observe  and  perfectly  to  ful- 
fil the  divine  law. 


372  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

To  be  subject  to  law  and  government,  to  submit  to  authority, 
and  to  live  according  to  command,  is  a  thing  to  which  men  natu- 
rally are  not  well  disposed.  The  carnal  mind  is  enmity  against 
God,  is  not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither  indeed  can  be.  It 
is  the  very  nature  of  the  carnal  mind  "  to  despise  government,  to 
be  presumptuous,  self-willed,  and  not  afraid  to  speak  evil  of  dig- 
nities." Especially  is  it  opposed  to  the  government  and  authority 
of  God.  It  is  this  authority  and  government  against  which  eve- 
ry wicked  man  has  rebelled,  and  from  which  he  has  revolted  ;  in 
which  rebellion  and  revolt  he  persists  and  perseveres,  as  long  as  he 
perseveres  in  his  wickedness.  And  according  as  he  sees  this  au- 
thority and  government  opposed  to  him,  according  as  he  sees 
God  is  his  enemy  and  is  disposed  to  bring  him  to  that  punishment 
he  justly  deserves,  in  the  same  proportion  will  his  heart  rise  and 
his  enmity  boil  out  against  God. 

And  in  the  same  proportion  as  the  enmity  of  wicked  men 
boils  and  rages  against  God  himself,  will  it  also  against  his  law  ; 
for  this  is  that  by  which  they  are  exposed  to  his  vengeance,  that 
which  binds  them  over  to  punishment.  But  however  wicked 
men  are  displeased  with  the  law,  and  however  their  enmity  against 
it  rises,  and  swells,  and  rages,  they  are  still  under  its  obligations. 
The  law  is  still  in  its  full  force  unrepealed  and  unabated  ;  and 
consequently  it  is  their  indispensable  duty  inviolably  to  observe, 
and  perfectly  to  fulfil  it. 

In  what  has  just  been  said  I  would  by  no  means  be  under- 
stood as  if  the  wicked  only  were  obliged  to  keep  the  law,  and 
not  the  godly  also.  These  latter  are  under  equal  obligations  to 
keep  the  law  as  the  former.  Entire  conformity  to  it  is  as  much 
the  indispensable  duty  of  the  godly,  as  of  the  ungodly.  The  law 
of  God  originally  respected  all  mankind.  It  was  not  given  for 
any  particular  sect,  class  or  division  of  men,  but  was  set  forth  as 
a  rule  of  obedience  to  be  observed  by  all.  Now  as  this  was  the 
original  design  and  intent  of  the  law  that  it  should  extend  to  all, 
so  it  is  manifest  from  our  doctrine  that  it  is  still  thus  extensive. 
For  by  our  subject  it  appears  that  the  law  remains  the  same  that 
it  ever  was,  in  its  full  force  and  whole  extent  ;  that  it  is  not  set 
aside,  or  abated  in  any  one  respect.  It  is  true  we  are  not  justi- 
fied by  the  deeds  of  law,  as  we  were  to  be  under  the  first  cove- 
nant. But  the  obligation  of  the  law  as  a  rule  of  life,  and  its  abil- 
ity to  justify,  are  two  very  different  things ;  and  the  former,  viz. 
its  obligation  as  a  rule  of  life,  is  the  very  same  now,  with  respect 
to  all  its  subjects,  that  it  ever  was.  Whether  men  are  godly  or 
ungodly,  there  is  in  this  respect  no  difference  ;  it  is  the  indispen- 
sable duty  of  all  to  live  in  perfect  obedience  to  the  divine  law ; 


THROUGH  FAITH.  373 

and  this  appears  as  already  said,  from  hence,  that  law  still  re- 
mains unrepealed  and  unabated. 

It  also  further  appears  from  God's  having  done  so  much  in  or- 
der to  honor  and  magnify  his  law.  Can  that  law  be  unworthy  of 
our  obedience,  which  God  has  judged  worthy  of  so  much  honor 
from  himself?  Can  it  be,  that  it  should  not  be  our  duty  perfect- 
ly to  observe  that  law,  which  God  has  judged  worthy  to  main- 
tain and  establish  by  so  great  an  atonement  as  that  of  the  death 
of  his  own  Son  ?  Can  that  law  with  impunity  be  violated,  neg- 
lected and  despised  by  us,  when  rather  than  it  should  be  set 
aside  in  any  one  instance,  or  suffer  the  least  disgrace,  the  Son  of 
God  would  die  to  magnify  it,  and  make  it  honorable  ? 

What  greater  and  more  emphatical,  or  even  so  great  and  so 
emphatical  expression  of  the  sense  which  God  has  of  the  glory 
of  his  law,  could  be  made,  as  that  which  is  made  by  the  death  of 
Christ,  to  maintain  and  support  its  honor  and  authority  ?  And 
how  could  God  more  loudly  have  called  upon  us,  cordially  to 
submit  to  it,  and  to  obey  it  perfectly  ?  All  the  honor  which  it 
is  possible  for  us  to  express  to  the  divine  law,  even  by  our  most 
perfect  obedience,  is  infinitely  less  than  the  honor  done  it  by  the 
atonement  of  Christ.  If  then  it  was  a  fit  and  proper  thing,  that 
Christ  should  die  upon  the  cross  to  do  honor  to  the  divine  law, 
how  even  infinitely  more  proper  is  it,  and  with  what  infinite  obli- 
gations are  we  bound  to  render  it  all  the  honor  in  our  power,  by 
the  most  perfect  obedience  and  punctual  observance  on  our  part 
of  all  its  demands  ? 

Nor  is  it  only  our  duty  to  keep  the  whole  divine  law,  or  all 
the  particular  commands  of  it,  in  some  measure,  or  as  we  are  apt 
to  say,  "  as  well  as  we  can."  Here  are  we  not  apt  to  de- 
ceive ourselves  with  the  lurking  opinion  that  under  the  first  cove- 
nant indeed,  before  the  fall  of  man,  when  we  were  in  a  state  of 
innocence  and  free  from  corruption,  then  it  was  our  duty  to  ren- 
der a  perfect  obedience  to  the  law  of  God  ;  but  that  since  we 
are  fallen,  and  our  hearts  are  become  corrupt,  and  we  have  lost 
all  power  and  ability  to  obey  the  divine  law,  now  God  does  not 
require  of  us,  his  poor,  feeble  creatures,  a  perfect  observance  of 
his  law,  as  that  is  out  of  our  power  ;  but  that  he  requires  only 
our  imperfect  sincere  obedience  ;  so  that  all  the  divine  law  now 
binds  us  to,  is  this  imperfect  sincere  obedience,  and  nothing  more 
is  our  duty. 

But  is  this  indeed  so  ?  Because  God  is  pleased,  in  free  grace, 
to  accept  the  repenting,  humble  sinner  returning  to  him  through 
Christ,  not  for  the  sake  of  his  imperfect  obedience,  but  entirely 
for  the  sake  of  the  merits  of  Christ,  will  it  thence  follow  that 

32* 


374  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

God's  law  requires  of  him  no  more  than  imperfect  obedience,  and 
that  no  more  is  his  duty  ?  And  as  to  the  excuse  we  make,  that 
we  cannot  obey  the  law  perfectly,  will  it  follow  that  because  we 
are  so  wicked  and  corrupt,  and  so  fully  set  to  do  evil  that  we 
have  no  heart  to  do  good,  we  are  therefore  under  no  obligation 
to  cease  to  do  evil  and  learn  to  do  well  ?  Besides,  we  may  make 
the  same  excuse  concerning  all  duty  whatever.  For  it  is  truly 
the  case  that  we  have  naturally  no  disposition,  no  heart  to  any 
one  of  the  duties  required  of  us  either  in  the  law  or  the  gospel. 
Shall  we  then  excuse  ourselves  from  all  duty  whatever,  by  say- 
ing we  cannot  perform  it  ?  Do  the  sacred  scriptures  any  where 
admit  of  this  excuse  as  good  and  valid  ?  Or  do  they  undertake 
any  where  seriously  to  answer  it,  as  if  there  were  in  it  any  force 
or  plausibility  ?  We  read  indeed  of  one  who  gave  as  an  excuse 
for  his  not  coming  to  the  supper,  that  having  lately  married  a 
wife  he  therefore  could  not  come.  But  this  excuse,  that  he  could 
not  come,  is  so  far  from  being  considered  as  valid  and  sufficient, 
that  there  is  no  kind  of  notice  taken  of  it.  The  sacred  scriptures 
just  in  a  plain  and  simple  manner  inform  us  what  is  our  duty, 
and  require  of  us  an  immediate  compliance  :  and  in  case  we  do 
not  finally  comply  with  the  terms  of  salvation,  they  warn  us  of 
the  fearful  and  certain  consequence.  Whether  we  can  or  can- 
not, that  is,  whether  we  have,  or  have  not  a  heart  to  obey,  the 
sacred  scriptures  make  no  difierence  in  their  claims.  Comply 
we  must,  or  the  consequence  is  certairt.  Certainly  that  excuse 
must  be  frivolous  and  groundless,  of  which  the  sacred  scriptures 
take  no  notice  ;  and  to  delude  ourselves  with  it,  is,  to  the  high- 
est degree,  vain  and  sinful.  It  is  but  to  mock  God,  and  cheat 
ourselves  to  ruin. 

Let  us  then  examine  whether  we  are  deceiving  ourselves  thus. 
We  believe  we  are  converted  and  become  christians,  and  there- 
fore our  state  is  safe  ;  why  then,  we  may  ask,  need  we  be  so 
very  scrupulous  about  keeping  the  law  ?  Our  sins  we  believe  are 
pardoned  already  through  the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness. 
Our  eternal  state  then  being  secured,  whatever  sins  we  shall 
hereafter  commit,  still  we  shall  certainly  be  saved.  What  if  we 
do  commit  this,  or  that,  or  the  other  sin  ?  Christ's  righteousness  is 
abundantly  sufficient  to  atone  for  them  all.  But  what  saith  the 
apostle  to  this  ?  "  What  shall  we  say  then  ?"  says  he  ;  "  shall 
we  continue  in  sin  that  grace  may  abound  ?  God  forbid.  How 
shall  we  that  are  dead  to  sin,  live  any  longer  therein  ?  What 
then  ?  shall  we  sin,  because  we  are  not  under  the  law,  but  un- 
der grace  ?  God  forbid.  Know  ye  not,  that  to  whom  ye  yield 
yourselves  servants  to  obey,  his  servants  ye  are  to  whom  ye  obey,; 


THROUGH  FAITH.  375 

whether  of  sin  unto  death,  or  of  obedience  unto  righteousness  ?" 
Shall  those  who  suppose  they  are  made  the  subjects  of  the  grace 
of  God,  thence  grow  bold  and  presumptuous  in  sin  ?  Those  who 
are  indeed  the  subjects  of  this  grace  are  under  the  highest,  even 
infinite  obligations  to  God,  to  show  their  gratitude  by  all  possible 
ways  of  honor  and  respect.  Shall  these  then,  presuming  upon 
his  pardoning  mercy,  dishonor  God  by  breaking  and  despising 
his  law  ?  This  would  be  indeed  to  make  void  the  law  through 
faith  ;  and  it  would  prove  tliat  we  are  hypocrites  or  self-deceivers, 
still  "  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  the  bonds  of  iniquity." 

2.  Another  inference  naturally  drawn  from  our  doctrine  is, 
that  the  evil  and  icickedness  of  every  transgressor  of  the  divine 
law  must  be  exceeding  great.  If  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  of  God, 
died  upon  the  cross  to  honor  and  magnify  the  law  ;  if  this  law 
was  so  glorious  in  the  eyes  of  God  that  rather  than  its  penalties 
and  threatenings  should  not  be  executed,  he  poured  out  the  vials 
of  his  wrath  upon  his  own  Son  ;  if  nothing  less  than  the  blood  of 
the  second  person  in  the  trinity  could  atone  for  the  transgressions 
of  sinners  against  it :  if  all  this  is  true,  as  is  manifest  from  our 
doctrine,  then  it  must  needs  be  that  the  evil  and  wickedness  of 
sin  and  of  every  transgression  of  the  law  is  exceeding  great. 
What  is  meant  by  saying  the  evil  of  sin,  or  transgression  of  a 
law  is  great,  but  that  a  great  atonement  is  required  in  order  to 
expiate  that  sin  ?  But  in  order  to  expiate  any  transgression  of 
the  divine  law,  an  infinite  atonement  was  requisite.  The  evil 
then  of  any  sin  or  transgression  of  the  law  must  be  properly  infi- 
nite, and  deserves  an  infinite  punishment.  If  it  M^ere  not  infi- 
nitely great  and  did  not  deserve  an  infinite  punishment,  how 
could  an  infinite  atonement  have  been  requisite,  and  how  could 
Christ  have  died  ? 

But  who  are  these  who  are  guilty  of  so  great  wickedness. 
Are  they  some  distant  people,  that  we  have  merely  heard  of? 
No,  my  hearers,  as  the  prophet  Nathan  said  to  David,  so  may 
we  say  to  ourselves,  "  We  are  the  men."  We  have  been  guilty 
of  this  exceeding  great  wickedness  in  sinning  against  God.  We 
have  broken  that  law  which  was  so  glorious  in  his  eyes.  We  by 
our  transgression  have  despised  and  dishonored  that  law  which 
Christ  died  to  honor.  And  we  have  exposed  ourselves  to  the 
sentence  of  that  law,  which  condemns  to  eternal  destruction  for 
every  transgression.  This  our  condition  is  one  of  deep  danger ; 
and  it  appears  the  more  so  because  we  infer  from  our  doctrine, 

3.  The  entire  justice  of  that  sentence  that  condemns  to  eter- 
nal death  all  who  transgress  the  law  even  in  one  instance. 
This    sentence  is  certainly  just,  if  the  punishment  to  which  it 


376  THE  LAW  NOT  MADE  VOID 

condemns  is  no  more  than  equal  to  the  crime.  Any  punishment 
which  is  only  equal  to  the  crime  committed,  is  certainly  a  just 
punishment.  But  in  the  instance  before  us,  every  crime  or  sin 
committed  against  God  is  so  great,  that  no  atonement  but  the 
death  of  Jesus  Christ  which  is  an  atonement  of  infinite  worth,  is 
sufficient  to  atone  for  it.  For  God  never,  consistently  with  his 
own  glory,  could  have  pardoned  any  one  sin,  had  not  Christ  died. 
The  nature  then  of  every  sin  being  such  that  it  requires  an  infi- 
nite atonement,  it  must  certainly  justly  deserve  an  infinite  pun- 
ishment, and  the  sentence  which  condemns  to  it,  is  a  just,  right- 
eous and  holy  sentence ;  and  were  it  not  for  the  mere  grace  of 
God  it  would  be  actually  executed  upon  every  one  of  our  race. 
Were  it  not  for  the  mere  grace  of  God,  we  should  each  one  of 
us  be  eternally  condemned  for  even  the  least  transgression,  and 
lie  down  forever  under  God's  wrath.  It  is  mere  grace,  and  that 
only,  which  prevents  it.  As  to  justice,  that  lays  no  bar  in  the 
way,  and  has  no  plea  to  make  in  our  behalf.  On  the  contrary, 
it  is  utterly  and  forever  against  us.  It  vindicates  the  sentence, 
and  demands  its  execution,  and  our  perdition.  Even  the  great- 
est saint  on  earth,  on  the  footing  of  justice,  deserves  eternal  con- 
demnation. All  his  present  holiness,  and  true  godliness,  cannot 
atone  for  even  the  least  of  all  his  sins.  And  though,  through 
the  grace  of  God,  he  shall  certainly  be  saved,  yet  it  is  only  and 
merely  by  grace.  As  to  justice  and  desert,  on  the  footing  of 
these,  he  is  still  as  much  as  ever  exposed  to  the  sentence  of  the 
law,  and  deserving  of  the  wrath  of  God  forever. 

4.  How  great  and  wonderful  then  is  the  grace  oj  God  by 
which  we  are  saved !  How  free  and  unmerited  is  it  with  re- 
gard even  to  the  greatest  saints  !  "Not  by  works  of  righteous- 
ness which  we  have  done,  but  according  to  his  mercy  he  saved 
us."  That  is  great  mercy  and  grace,  which  forgives  great  of- 
fences. And  in  proportion  as  the  offences  are  greater,  so  is  the 
grace  which  forgives  them.  Now  the  offences  against  God  which 
divine  grace  pardons,  are  offences  infinitely  great.  So  that  the 
grace  of  God  exercised  in  pardoning  any  one,  even  the  least  of 
all  sinners,  is  infinite  grace.  No  one  sinner  whatever  can  be 
pardoned,  not  only  without  the  exertion  of  free  grace  ;  but  no 
sinner  can  be  pardoned  without  the  exertion  of  that  grace  which 
is  infinitely  great.  Upon  the  whole  then,  with  what  sentiments 
ought  our  doctrine  to  inspire  our  hearts  !  How  adorable  and 
astonishing  is  the  wisdom,  goodness  and  grace  of  God  !  How 
glorious  and  amiable  and  excellent  is  the  law  of  God  !  How 
strong  is  our  obligation  to  observe  and  fulfil  this  perfectly  !  How 
great  are  the  wickedness  and  guilt  of  every  transgression  !     How 


THKOUGH  FAITH.  377 

much  ought  we  to  humble  ourselves  before  God,  and  walk  be- 
fore him  all  our  days  with  fear  and  trembling,  because  we  have 
thus  sinned  !  How  great  glory  and  praise  ought  we  to  ascribe 
to  God  ;  and  renouncing  all  self-dependence  and  self-righteous- 
ness as  filthy  rags,  how  ought  we  to  "  abhor  ourselves  and  repent 
in  dust  and  ashes !"  Our  only  cry  should  be  that  of  the  publi- 
can, "  God  be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner."  "  Not  unto  us,  O  Lord  ! 
not  unto  us,  but  to  thy  great  name  be  the  glory  forever,  for  thy 
mercy  and  for  thy  truth's  sake !" 


SERMON  XXIV. 


THE  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY  OF  THE  ELECT.* 

Romans  8 :  33. — "  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?" 

All  mankind  are  by  nature  criminals.  The  crime  laid  to 
their  charge  is  nothing  short  of  high  treason  against  God.  And 
not  only  are  they  criminals,  charged  with  so  black  a  crime,  but 
they  are  convicted  of  it,  and  sentence  of  condemnation  is  actual- 
ly gone  forth  against  them.  For  "  he  that  believeth  not  is  con- 
demned already,  because  he  hath  not  believed  on  the  name  of 
the  only  begotten  Son  of  God." 

This  is  the  state  of  all  men  by  nature.  In  the  course  of  life, 
however,  a  vast  difference  in  their  state  and  character  sometimes 
takes  [)lace.  For  while  the  generality  still  remain  "  dead  in  tres- 
passes and  sins,"  and  of  consequence  condemned  by  the  right- 
eous sentence  of  the  divine  law,  yet  we  read  in  the  text,  "  Who 
shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?"  and  again  in 
the  beginning  of  this  chapter,  •'  There  is  therefore  now  no  con- 
demnation to  them  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after 
the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spirit."  Thus  we  are  taught  by  inspira- 
tion itself  that  a  certain  class  of  men,  called  in  the  text  "  the 
elect,"  are  in  so  different  a  state  from  the  rest  of  mankind,  that 
while  the  latter  are  charged  with  the  crime  of  rebellion  against 
heaven,  and  high  treason  against  the  omnipotent  Jehovah,  the  for- 
mer are  in  a  state  of  justification,  and  none  can  lay  anything  to 
their  charge. 

But  here  several  questions  naturally  arise  ;  as.  Who  are  these 
elect ;  why  can  no  one  lay  anything  to  their  charge  ;  how  were 
they  brought  out  of  that  state  of  ruin  in  which  they  with  the  rest 
of  mankind  were  involved,  into  their  present  state  so  different 
from  it ;  and  what  peculiar  propriety  is  there  in  the  question  of 
the  text.  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  their  charge  ?  To  each  of 
these  things  I  would  attend  in  its  order. 

I.   Who  are  the  elect  spoken  of  in  the  text  1 

By  the  elect  here,  I  conceive,  we  are  not  to  understand  all  those 

*  First  preached  in  1774. 


ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY  OP  THE  ELECT.  379 

who  are  predestinated  to  eternal  life.  This  and  other  words  of  the 
same  import,  are  sometimes,  if  not  generally  used  in  the  scrip- 
tures in  this  large  extent  ;  as  for  example,  in  Eph.  1:  4,  5.  But 
in  our  text  it  must  be  understood  in  a  more  restricted  sense,  as 
referring  only  to  those  of  the  elect  who  now  appear  to  be  such, 
or  to  those  who  are  born  again,  become  true  penitents  and  be- 
lievers, and  consequently  are  pardoned,  and  justified,  and  accep- 
ted of  God.  Tiiese  are  the  elect  intended  by  the  apostle,  and  it 
is  manifest  he  did  not  intend  any  other.  For  concerning  the 
rest  of  those  who  are  predestinated  to  eternal  life,  it  can  witli  no 
propriety  be  asked,  "  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  their  charge  ?" 
Nor  can  it  be  truly  added,  "  It  is  God  that  justifieth,"  for  he  has 
not  justified  them.  But  as  they  remain  hitherto  rebellious,  they 
are  under  the  sentence  of  condemnation  ;  they  are  "  condemned 
already,  because  they  have  not  believed  on  the  name  of  the  only 
begotten  Son  of  God."  And  while  they  remain  in  their  present 
state,  God  himself  lays  to  their  charge  all  the  sins  they  have  ever 
committed ;  and  it  is  only  in  consequence  of  faith  in  an  atoning 
Redeemer  that  they  can  ever  be  delivered  from  the  charge.  We 
are  under  the  necessity  then  of  understanding  the  word  in  this 
restricted  sense  ; — for  otherwise  we  must  suppose  that  a  man  is 
pardoned,  and  justified  before  he  repents  and  believes  ;  which  is 
contrary  to  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  scriptures. 

By  the  elect  therefore  we  are  to  understand  true  christians  ; 
those  who  have  been  born  again  ;  who  are  brought  to  true  repen- 
tance of  their  sins  ;  who  believe  in  Christ,  and  hope  for  salvation 
only  through  him  in  dependence  on  the  Holy  Spirit ;  who  are  re- 
conciled to  God,  so  far  as  to  love  him  supremely,  to  his  law,  so 
as  to  submit  to,  and  obey  it,  and  to  his  gospel  so  as  to  rejoice  in 
it,  and  testify  their  regard  for  it  by  a  suitable  life  and  conversa- 
tion. 

Having  thus  shown  whom  we  are  to  understand  by  the  elect, 
the  way  is  prepared  to  enter  upon  the  next  inquiry  proposed,  viz. 

n.    Why  can  no  one  lay  anything  to  their  charge  1 

What  can  be  the  reason  of  this?     I  answer, 

1.  It  is  not  because  they  have  never  been  guilty  of  any  crime, 
or  sin.  If  this  were  indeed  the  case  it  would  be  downright  in- 
justice to  lay  anything  to  their  charge,  and  therefore  it  would  be 
no  wonder  that  the  question  of  the  text  should  be  put  with  so 
much  assurance.  But  this  is  far  from  being  the  case,  as  we  have 
just  now  shown.  They  by  nature  are  equally  depraved  with  the 
rest  of  mankind.  And  not  only  so,  but  before  their  conversion 
they  may  have  been  as  bad  by  practice  as  any.  In  the  scrip- 
tures we  read  of  Mary  Magdalene  out  of  whom  our  Lord  cast 


380  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY 

seven  devils.  Yet  she  afterwards  became  one  of  God's  elect,  in 
the  sense  before  described.  Then  we  read  also  of  Saul  the  per- 
secutor, who  breathed  out  threatenings  and  slaughter  against  the 
christian  church,  being  exceedingly  mad  against  it,  and  who  yet 
afterwards  became  a  chosen  messenger  of  mercy  to  convey  the 
name  of  God  to  the  Gentiles.  We  have,  too,  a  remarkable  testi- 
mony of  the  apostle  Paul,  very  pertinent  to  our  present  purpose, 
in  1  Cor.  6:  9,  etc.,  "  Be  not  deceived ;  neither  fornicators,  nor 
idolators,  nor  adulterers,  nor  effeminate,  nor  abusers  of  themselves 
with  mankind,  nor  thieves,  nor  covetous,  nor  drunkards,  nor  re- 
vilers,  nor  extortioners,  shall  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God.  And 
such  were  some  of  you  ;  but  ye  are  washed,  but  ye  are  sanctifi- 
ed, but  ye  are  justified  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  and  by 
the  Spirit  of  our  God."  And  as  this  had  been  the  character  of 
some  of  the  Corinthian  converts,  so  it  may  be  the  character  of 
others  in  the  present,  or  any  other  age  of  the  church,  who  yet 
may  afterwards  become  the  true  disciples  of  Christ,  and  with  the 
greatest  truth  and  propriety  be  reckoned  among  the  elect  of  God. 
And  all  believers  have  doubtless  many  actual  transgressions,  as 
well  as  their  original  sin,  which  might  justly  be  laid  to  their  charge. 
The  reason  therefore  of  asking  the  question  in  the  text  cannot  be 
that  they  have  never  been  guilty  of  any  crimes,  or  contracted  any 
guilt.     Nor  is  it, 

2.  This,  that  although  they  had  formerly  been  guilty  of  sins,  yet 
they  are  not  guilty  of  any  now,  since  their  conversion  ;  so  that 
whatever  may  have  been  the  case  with  them  formerly,  nothing 
can  now  be  justly  laid  to  their  charge.  This  I  say,  is  not  the 
reason  of  the  question  in  the  text.  No  ;  for  upon  a  little  exam- 
ination we  shall  find  that  this  is  as  far  from  the  truth,  as  that 
they  have  never  committed  any  sin.  The  sacred  scriptures  tell 
us  "  there  is  not  a  just  man  upon  earth,  that  doeth  good  and  sin- 
neth  not ;"  and  again,  "  in  many  things  we  offend  all  ;"  that  is, 
"  we  all  offend  ;"  and  again,  "  Who  can  say  I  have  made  my  heart 
clean,  I  am  free  from  my  sins?"  and  still  again,  "if  we  say  we 
have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves,  and  the  truth  is  not  in  us."  By 
all  these  passages  of  scripture  it  appears  that  even  the  best  of 
men  are  not  clear  of  sin,  but  that  they  daily  offend  in  thought, 
word  or  deed,  or  perhaps  in  all  these.  There  is  therefore  suffi- 
cient matter  of  charge  against  the  christian,  not  only  upon  the 
footing  of  his  former  sins,  committed  before  his  conversion,  but 
upon  the  footing  of  those  which  have  been  committed  since,  and 
are  daily  committed  by  him  in  the  continual  course  of  his  life. 
Again,  I  observe, 

3.  That  the  reason  why  nothing  is  to  be  laid  to  the  christian's 


OF  THE  ELECT.  381 

charge  is  not  that  he  does  not  deserve  that  his  sins  should  be 
charged  against  him,  and  to  be  condemned  for  them.  This  seems 
to  be  the  vain  conceit  of  some.  They  seem  to  imagine  that  the 
behever,  since  he  is  become  a  behever,  no  longer  deserves  that 
his  sins  should  be  charged  to  his  account,  or  he  be  at  all  punish- 
ed for  them.  But  let  us  consider  the  consequences  of  such  a  sup- 
position. It  is  evidently  this,  that  the  pardon,  the  justification  of 
the  believer  is  not  an  act  of  mercy  but  of  justice.  Surely  if  a 
man  do  not  deserve  punishment,  it  is  no  act  of  grace  to  let  him  go 
free  of  punishment.  He  is  not  a  sinner,  but  a  just,  and  righteous 
person  ;  and  to  acquit  and  justify  such  a  one  is  no  act  of  grace, 
but  an  act  of  justice  which  he  may  demand  as  a  debt.  Now  to 
suppose  this  in  the  case  of  the  believer's  justification,  is  to  over- 
throw entirely  the  grace  of  that  justification,  and  to  put  him  upon 
the  footing  of  the  covenant  of  works.  But  how  ill  does  it  be- 
come us  thus  to  frustrate  the  grace  of  God  ! 

True  it  is  that  God  has  bound  himself,  by  his  immutable  pro- 
mise, to  forgive  and  justify  the  sinner  immediately  upon  his  be- 
lieving. But  both  this  promise  itself,  and  the  fulfilment  of  it  are 
not  of  debt,  but  of  mere  grace.  The  reason  therefore  why  no- 
thing is  to  be  laid  to  the  charge  of  the  believer,  is  not  that  he  does 
not  deserve  it.  Upon  the  footing  of  law  and  justice  he  has  no 
right  to  any  blessing  ;  and  yet  upon  the  footing  of  grace,  and  by 
the  promise  of  the  gospel,  he  has  a  right  to  all  blessings. 

The  truth  is,  the  sins  of  the  believer  not  only  deserve  the  same 
condemnation,  as  those  of  other  men  ;  but  in  some  respects  they 
have  a  peculiar  demerit,  and  are  more  vile,  and  ill-deserving  than 
those  of  others.  His  sins  are  committed  with  some  peculiar  ag- 
gravations. It  is  a  true  maxim,  that  the  more  light  a  man  has, 
and  the  greater  the  mercy  against  which  he  sins,  the  more  aggra- 
vated is  his  guilt.  Now  for  both  these  reasons  the  sins  of  the  be- 
liever, are  sins  of  peculiar  aggravation.  For  in  the  first  place  he 
is  favored  with  much  greater  light  than  other  men.  "The  God 
of  this  world  hath  blinded  the  minds"  of  all  "  those  which  believe 
not,  lest  the  light  of  the  glorious  gospel  of  Christ  should  shine  un- 
to them."  But  "  God  who  commanded  the  light  to  sliine  out  of 
darkness,  hath  shined  into  the  heart  of  the  believer,  to  give  him 
the  light  of  the  knowledge  of  the  glory  of  God,  in  the  face  of 
Jesus  Christ."  He  is  enlightened  to  see  the  true  character  of 
God,  and  his  obligation  to  love  and  serve  him  ;  the  glory  of  the 
law,  and  his  obligation  to  obey  it ;  the  glory  of  Jesus  Christ,  and 
his  obligation  to  believe  on  him.  Whereas  the  sinner  is  natural- 
ly blind  to  all  these  things,  and  never  does  see  the  true  spiritual 
glory  of  them  till  he  is  enlightened  of  God  in  regeneration.     And 

Vol.  II.  33 


382  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY 

as  the  believer  has  so  much  more  light  than  the  unbeliever,  so  in 
this  respect  his  sins  are  attended  with  a  peculiar  aggravation. 

They  are  also  peculiarly  aggravated  for  the  other  reason  men- 
tioned, viz.  they  are  committed  against  ^reo/er  mercy  than  those 
of  others.  The  believer  has  not  only  been  favored  with  the  com- 
mon mercies  of  life,  and  the  ordinary  means  of  grace  ;  but  he 
has  tasted  that  the  Lord  is  gracious  ;  he  is  made  the  subject  of 
the  saving  grace  of  God,  so  that  he  is  pardoned,  and  justified, 
and  is  admitted  into  a  peculiar  relation  to  God,  even  to  the  rela- 
tion of  a  child.  Now  for  a  child  to  rise  up  in  rebellion  against 
his  father,  especially  when  that  father  has  been  peculiarly  kind  to 
him,  has  forgiven  him  many  former  acts  of  rebellion,  and  has  be- 
stowed upon  him  many  inestimable  and  eternal  blessings  ;  I  say 
for  a  child  under  those  circumstances  to  rebel  against  his  parent, 
would  be  an  act  of  very  aggravated  wickedness  indeed.  And 
yet  this  is  the  very  case  of  the  believer,  in  all  the  sins  he  commits 
after  his  conversion. 

But  if  none  of  these  are  the  reasons  why  the  believer  can  have 
no  charge  brought  against  him,  what,  I  may  be  asked,  is  the  rea- 
son ?     This   question   I  shall  now   endeavor  directly  to  answer. 

The  reason  is  that  he  believes  in  Christ.  The  constitution  of 
the  gospel  is  this,  that  whosoever  believes  in  Christ  shall  be  par- 
doned and  justified,  and  no  charge  brought  against  him  shall  be 
of  any  avail  to  procure  his  condemnation.  God  has  settled  this 
constitution  from  the  respect  he  has  to  his  own  Son,  and  to  his 
complete  and  infinitely  glorious  righteousness.  Such  is  his  love 
to  his  Son  and  his  well  pleasedness  in  him,  that  as  soon  as  the 
sinner  believes  in  him,  that  is,  as  soon  as  he  is  reconciled  to  him, 
accepts  him  as  his  Savior,  and  in  this  view  depends  on  him,  God 
immediately  pardons  all  his  sins  however  great  and  many  they 
may  have  been,  and  entitles  him  to  heaven  and  all  its  invaluable 
blessings. 

An  earthly  parent  may  have  such  an  affection  for  one  of  his 
sons,  who  is  very  dutiful  and  obedient  as  to  pardon  another  re- 
bellious child  who  pleads  his  brother's  goodness,  and  for  whom 
that  brother  intercedes.  And  this  the  father  does,  not  out  of  any 
respect  to,  or  well-pleasedness  in  this  rebellious  child ;  but  mere- 
ly because  he  is  well  pleased  with  the  duty  and  obedience  of  the 
other  who  intercedes  for  him.  In  like  manner  a  king  on  account 
of  the  intercession  of  a  very  good  and  dutiful  subject,  may  be 
pleased  to  forgive  a  rebel.  And  so  God  for  Christ's  sake  pardons, 
and  justifies  the  greatest  sinner,  who  believes  on  him,  as  the  only 
intercessor  and  redeemer. 

Now  God  having  in  this  way  justified  the  sinner,  none  can  lay 


OF  THE   ELECT.  383 

anytliing  to  his  charge.  Though  he  really  deserves  that  all  his 
sins  should  be  charged  to  his  account,  both  those  committed  be- 
fore conversion  and  those  after,  yet  God  having  once  justified  him, 
all  his  sins  are  cast  behind  his  back,  and  are  buried  as  in  the  depths 
of  the  sea.  Tiiey  ate  as  though  they  had  not  been.  They  can 
never  be  charged  to  his  account  either  in  this  world  or  in  the 
world  to  come. 

We  come  now  to  the  next  question  upon  the  text,  which  is, 

III.  How  are  true  clwislians  brought  out  of  the  slate  in 
which  they  with  the  rest  of  mankind  are  involved  in  one  com- 
mon ruin,  into  their  present  state  which  is  so  different  from  it  ? 

What  is  the  cause  of  this  great  difference  ?  We  have  already 
shown  that  the  sins  of  the  believer  are  freely  forgiven  in  conse- 
(juence  of  faith.  But  how  does  it  come  to  pass  that  they  believe 
while  others  do  not  ? 

In  the  acts  of  the  apostles  we  read  that  "  some  believed  and 
some  believed  not ;"  and  again  that  "  the  election  obtained,  and 
the  rest  were  blinded."  Now  whence  does  this  difference  arise? 
JVot  from  the  superior,  natural  goodness  of  some  above  others  ; 
for  all  men  by  nature  are  "  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins."  "  There 
is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  one."  No  one  is  more  inclined 
by  nature  to  repent,  return  to  God,  and  believe  on  Christ  than 
another.  And  in  vain  shall  any  one  expect  of  himself,  without 
tlic  aid  of  supernatural  grace,  to  rise  from  his  spiritual  sloth  to  a 
life  of  true  holiness.  As  soon  might  we  have  expected  that  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  would  have  risen  from  the  grave  without  a  di- 
vine agency.  And  this  is  the  very  example  which  the  apostle 
Paul  brings  to  illustrate  the  subject  now  before  us  in  Eph.  1:18, 
19,  20,  "  That  ye  rnay  know  what  is  the  exceeding  greatness  of 
his  power  to  us  ward,  who  believe  according  to  the  working  of 
his  mighty  power,  which  he  wrought  in  Christ  when  he  raised 
him  from  the  dead,  and  set  him  at  his  own  right  hand  in  heaven- 
ly places."  It  is  true  indeed,  there  is  this  remarkable  difference 
between  the  similitude,  and  the  thing  it  is  brought  to  illustrate ; 
that  a  dead  corpse  is  not  a  moral  agent,  and  consequently  can- 
not be  made  the  subject  of  either  praise  or  blame.  Though  it 
continue  in  its  present  state,  no  blame  is  to  be  ascribed  to  it.  Or 
if  it  be  raised  from  the  dead  it  deserves  no  praise.  But  tlie  case 
is  quite  otherwise  with  the  soul  which  is  dead  in  a  spiritual  sense. 
j  This  very  state  of  death  is  a  state  of  sin,  and  so  long  as  the  soul 
j  continues  in  this  state,  it  continues  in  a  state  of  sin  ;  and  surely 
'  sin,  in  the  very  idea  of  it,  is  blamable  and  ill-deserving.  The 
soul  therefore  deserves  the  punishment  threatened  against  all  sin, 
that  is  eternal  condemnation,  for  continuing  though  it  be  but  for 
one  hour,  in  its  natural  state  of  spiritual  death. 


384  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY 

On  the  other  hand  whenever  it  revives  from  this  state,  howev- 
er the  divine  power  is  exerted  in  order  to  this  effect,  yet  because 
it  is  made  willing  in  the  day  of  God's  power,  and  so  in  reviving 
is  active  as  well  as  passive,  therefore  the  spiritual  reviving  of  such 
a  soul  is  an  amiable  act  of  true  holiness. 

Upon  the  whole  it  is  only  in  consequence  of  the  sovereign,  dis- 
tinguishing grace  of  God  bestowed  in  regeneration,  only  through 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  that  any  of  mankind  become  be- 
lievers, and  consequently  are  delivered  from  the  charge  of  sin  and 
the  condemnation  of  the  law.  God  maketh  us  to  differ  one  from 
another.  And  being  once  reconciled  to  him  in  regeneration, 
we  are  of  course  reconciled  to  his  Son,  and  so  cordially  receive 
him  in  true  faith,  to  be  our  Savior. 

The  last  proposed    inquiry  still  remaining  to  be  considered  is, 

IV.  What  peculiar  propriety  is  there  in  the  question  of  the 
text,  "  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?" 

To  this  query  I  answer,  that  it  seems  in  part  to  consist  in  this, 
that  it  is  even  a  more  strong  negation  of  the  thing  inquired  than 
if  it  had  been  simply  denied.  It  is  as  if  the  apostle  had  said, 
"  Who  will  be  so  daring,  as  when  God  justifies,  to  undertake  to 
condemn,  or  to  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  the  elect  ?"  It  is 
so  plain  a  case  that  even  the  most  audaciously  wicked  will  not  ad- 
venture to  do  it. 

Again,  it  is  observable  that  the  interrogative  "  who"  seems  to 
be  emphatical.  "  Who  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's 
elect?"  Shall  God  ?  No;  it  is  he  that  justifies  them.  Shall 
Christ  ?  No  ;  it  is  he  that  died  for  them.  Shall  the  angels  in 
glory  ?  No ;  there  is  joy  in  heaven  among  them  when  even  a 
single  sinner  repents,  and  is  justified.  Shall  the  saints  in  heaven 
or  upon  earth  ?  No  ;  these  are  the  very  elect,  and  surely  will 
never  reject  the  justifying  grace  of  God  against  themselves.  Shall 
the  devils  and  wicked  men  do  it  ?  Alas  !  what  charge  can  they 
exhibit  which  will  not  fall  even  with  greater  weight  upon  them- 
selves? No!  however  desirous  they  may  be  of  bringing  others 
into  the  same  place  of  torment  with  themselves,  yet  even  these 
envious  and  wicked  spirits  will  be  so  convinced  of  the  irreversi- 
bility of  the  decree  of  justification  that  is  gone  forth  in  favor  of 
the  elect,  that  they  will  not  attempt  to  exhibit  any  charge  against 
them.  Whom  God  loves  he  loves  unto  the  end,  and  nothing 
shall  be  able  to  separate  them  from  his  love  which  is  in  Christ  Je- 
sus our  Lord." 

Thus  I  have  endeavored  to  answer  the  several  queries  sugges- 
ted by  our  text ;  have  endeavored  to  show  whom  we  are  to  under- 
stand by  "  the  elect"  spoken  of  in  it ;  why  no  one  can  lay  anything 


OF  THE  ELECT.  385 

m 

to  their  charge  ;  how  they  are  brought  into  this  state  so  different 
from  that  of  the  rest  of  mankind,  and  what   pecuhar   propriety 
there  is  in  the  question  of  the  text  respecting  them. 
In  the  improvement  of  the  subject,  I  remark, 

1 .  We  may  observe  that  although  this  doctrine  ascribes  tlie 
justification  of  the  sinner  wholly  to  free  grace,  yet  it  does  not 
open  any  door  to  licentiousness.  The  only  way  in  which  it  can 
be  supposed  to  open  such  a  door,  is  by  encouraging  sinners  to 
imagine  that  they  may  be  justified  though  they  continue  in  sin. 
But  this  doctrine  gives  no  occasion  for  such  an  imagination.  No 
man  ever  will  be  justified  who  continues  in  impenitence  and  un- 
belief. Justification  is  obtained  only  in  consequence  of  repen- 
tance and  faith  ;  and  upon  the  condition  of  repentance  and  faith, 
any,  even  the  vilest  sinner  in  the  world  shall  be  justified.  There- 
fore while  there  is  the  greatest  encouragement  for  sinners  to  repent 
and  lead  a  holy  life,  it  is  absolute  ruin  for  them  to  remain  impen- 
itent. So  that  although  God  of  his  sovereign  grace  makes  some 
willing  in  the  day  of  his  power  to  comply  with  the  terms  of  the 
gospel,  and  sometimes  bestows  this  grace  on  some  of  the  greatest 
sinners  ;  yet  this  is  no  encouragement  for  any  to  continue  in  sin  ; 
for  though  there  is  abundant  assurance  given  of  mercy  and  salva- 
tion in  case  of  repentance  and  faith  ;  yet  without  these  there  is  no 
possibility  of  obtaining  salvation. 

2.  Hence  we  may  see  how  God  has  maintained  all  his  per- 
fections, and  glorified  his  whole  character  in  the  gospel.  The 
Psalmist,  under  a  spirit  of  prophecy,  foreseeing  the  state  of  things 
under  the  gospel  cries  out,  "  mercy  and  truth  are  met  together ; 
righteousness  and  peace  have  kissed  each  other."  These  at  first 
view  seem  to  be  inconsistent  and  jarring  attributes.  Mercy  calls 
for  the  salvation  of  the  sinner ;  while  truth  demands  his  condem- 
nation agreeably  to  the  original  divine  threatening.  So  righteous- 
ness requires  that  the  law  of  God  be  maintained  in  its  full  force, 
and  that  its  honor  be  not  in  the  least  abased.  But  on  the  other  hand 
peace  calls  for  reconciliation  between  God  and  man.  Now  how 
shall  all  these  things  be  brought  to  pass  ?  However  difficult  this  may 
seem,  they  are  all  accomplished  in  the  gospel.  The  calls  of  mer- 
cy and  peace  are  fully  answered,  as  through  Christ  reconciliation 
takes  place  and  salvation  is  bestowed  upon  the  sinner.  Yet  the 
requirements  of  truth  and  righteousness  are  fully  secured,  as  the 
threatening  of  God  is  executed  upon  our  substitute,  and  as  he 
hath  "  magnified  the  law  and  made  it  honorable."  So  that  now 
*■'  God  can  be  just,  and  yet  the  justifier  of  him  that  believeth  on 
Jesus." 

3.  From  what  has  been  said,  we   may  also  learn  how  much 

33* 


386  ACCEPTANCE  AND  SAFETY  OF  THE  ELECT. 

reason  we  have  to  humble  ourselves  before  God.  This  is  a  duty 
incumbent  upon  all,  both  saints  and  sinners,  believers  and  unbe- 
lievers. Doubtless  those  who  have  all  their  lives  long  unto  this 
time,  been  guilty  of  neglecting  and  transgressing  the  divine  law, 
of  hating  and  rebelling  against  God,  of  despising  and  rejecting 
his  Son,  the  only  Savior ;  doubtless  those  who  still  persevere  in 
their  sins  have  reason  to  humble  themselves  for  them  before  God, 
to  confess  and  bewail  them,  and  to  do  no  more  so  wickedly.  And 
the  same  is  true  with  regard  to  true  christians.  However  they 
have  repented  of  their  sins,  and  have  begun  to  walk  in  newness 
of  life,  yet  they  have  great  reason  to  humble  themselves  before 
God  for  their  daily  short  comings,  for  all  their  sins  committed 
against  so  many  strong  and  peculiar  obligations  as  they  are  laid 
under.  Humility  is  the  proper  character  of  the  christian ;  it  is 
a  grace  which  very  specially  becomes  him. 

4.  How  loudly  are  the  elect  colled  to  the  exercise  of  grati- 
tude. The  bestowment  of  kindness  implies  an  obligation  to  grat- 
itude, and  that  greater  or  less  according  to  the  greater  or  less 
good  or  kindness  bestowed.  But  there  can  be  no  greater  good 
bestowed  in  the  world  than  justification  and  a  title  to  eternal  life. 
And  such  is  the  good  bestowed  on  the  christian.  In  comparison 
with  this  good,  riches  and  honor,  provinces,  kingdoms  and  em- 
pires are  nothing.  If  then,  any  common  civilities  and  kindness 
between  neighbors  demand  gratitude,  how  much  more,  may  I  not 
say  infinitely  more  is  it  demanded  by  this  invaluable  gift  bestowed 
upon  every  true  christian. 

5.  What  reason  there  is  that  sinners  should  accept  the  offers 
of  life  which  are  fully  made  to  them  in  the  gospel.  There  can- 
not be  a  good  proposed  more  worthy  of  the  acceptance  of  the 
sinner.  He  is  therefore  not  only  bound  in  gratitude  to  accept  it, 
but  if  he  does  not  accept  it  he  is  guilty  of  the  greatest  sin.  You 
may  reject  houses  and  lands,  honors  and  titles,  thrones  and  king- 
doms, and  be  blameless.  But  you  cannot  reject  Christ  and  heaven, 
without  being  guilty  of  the  darkest  wickedness,  and  exposing 
yourselves  to  the  severest  vengeance  of  an  angry  God.  For  he 
that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved,  and  he  that  believeth 
not  shall  be  damned  ;  and  while  to  the  penitent  and  believing  God 
is  a  refuge,  to  the  impenitent  and  the  unbelieving  he  "  is  a  con- 
suming fire." 


SERMON   XXV. 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS.* 

Matthew  6:  15. — JVeither  do  men  light  a  candle,  and  put  it  under  a  husliel, 
but  on  a  candlestick ;  and  it  giveth  light  unto  all  that  are  in  the.  house. 

These  words  are  a  part  of  Christ's  sermon  on  the  mount, 
which  was  addressed  particularly  to  his  disciples.  "  Ye,"  says 
he,  "are  the  salt  of  the  earth,"  But  who?  The  whole  crowd 
that  followed  him  into  the  mountain  ?  And  again,  "  Ye  are  the 
light  of  the  world."  Who?  All  those  multitudes  that  followed 
from  Galilee,  and  Decapolis,  and  Jerusalem,  and  from  beyond 
Jordan  ?  No  ;  but  his  disciples ;  who  all  professed  to  be,  and 
who  all,  except  one,  actually  were  his  true  and  faithful  followers. 
These  were  the  light  of  the  world,  and  these  were  a  city  set  on  a 
hill  that  could  not  be  hid. 

Thus  our  Lord  compares  his  disciples  to  a  light,  and  calls  them 
the  light  of  the  world  ;  and  under  this  similitude  he  proceeds  to 
draw  the  character  of  his  true  disciples,  and  to  tell  the  twelve 
apostles  what  they  must  be  if  they  would  be  such.  "  Neither  do 
men  light  a  candle,"  says  he,  "  and  put  it  under  a  bushel,  but  on 
a  candlestick,  and  it  giveth  light  unto  all  that  are  in  the  house." 
As  if  he  had  said,  "  As  I  just  told  you,  you  are  a  light,  even  the 
light  of  the  world.  But  what  is  the  use  of  a  light,  of  a  candle  for 
instance,  and  with  what  design  do  men  light  it  ?  Is  it  that  they 
may  put  it  under  a  bushel,  and  there  keep  it  concealed  from  the 
view  of  all  spectators  ?  No  ;  quite  the  reverse.  You  all  know 
that  the  use  of  a  candle  is  to  give  light  to  those  who  are  in  the 
house,  and  that  this  is  the  very  end  for  which  it  is  enkindled. 
Therefore  as  you  are  the  light  of  the  world,  it  behoves  you,  as  you 
would  ever  appear  in  character,  or  appear  what  you  profess  to  be, 
to  cause  your  light  to  shine  before  men  ;  so  to  shine  that  they 
may  see  your  good  works,  and  glorify  your  Father  which  is  in 
heaven." 

There  are  two  things  especially  taught  in  our  text:  1.  The  na- 
ture of  the  principle  of  grace  in  the  hearts  of  believers.     Believers 

*  First  preached  in  1769. 


388  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 

are  here  compared  to  a  light,  or  to  a  candle.  And  they  are  com- 
pared to  this  because  they  are  believers,  or  because  they  are  en- 
dowed with  a  principle  of  divine  grace.  It  is  on  account  of  this 
principle  that  it  is  proper  to  compare  them  to  a  light.  But  it  is 
the  nature  of  a  light,  or  of  a  candle  to  render  itself  visible  ;  to 
shed  abroad  a  bright  shining  splendor,  which  cannot  but  be  taken 
notice  of  by  all  who  are  in  proper  circumstances  to  observe  it. 
And  as  christians,  on  account  of  the  principle  of  grace  which  is 
in  them,  are  compared  to  a  light  or  candle,  we  are  thus  plainly 
taught  that  it  is  the  very  nature  of  this  principle  in  the  heart  to 
render  itself  visible  to  all  who  are  about  us,  and  in  circumstances 
to  observe  it.  2.  We  are  also  taught  in  these  words,  what  is  the 
end  for  which  this  principle  of  divine  grace  is  implanted  in  the 
hearts  of  believers.  Christ  tells  us  expressly  that  it  is  the  same  as 
that  for  which  men  light  a  candle,  viz.  that  it  may  give  light  and 
thus  be  of  service ;  that  men  may  see  their  good  works  and  thus 
be  led  to  glorify  their  Father  which  is  in  heaven.  Hence  we 
have,  then,  the  following  doctrine  : 

That  it  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  the  principle  of  divine 
grace,  and  also  the  end  for  which  it  is  communicated,  to  render 
itself  manifest  in  holy  practice.  In  discoursing  on  this  doctrine 
I  shall  endeavor  1.  To  show  that  this  is  the  nature  and  tendency 
of  the  principle  of  divine  grace  ;  and  2.  To  illustrate  this  truth, 
in  the  case  of  the  several  particular  graces. 

I.  /  would  show  that  it  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  the 
principle  of  divine  grace  in  the  heart  to  manifest  itself  in  holy 
practice. 

This  will  abundantly  appear  if  we  consider  the  representations 
which  the  scriptures  give  of  this  principle.  They  speak  of  it  un- 
der a  variety  of  names  and  views,  some  of  which  I  shall  now  lay 
before  you  ;  and  by  which  it  will  appear  tjiat  a  principle  of  grace 
is  a  lively,  active  principle  that  tends  directly  to  operate,  and 
manifest  itself  in  holy  practice. 

In  the  first  place,  this  principle  of  divine  grace  is  in  scripture 
called  the  divine  nature.  2  Pet.  1:  4,  "  Whereby  are  given  un- 
to us  exceeding  great  and  precious  promises  ;  that  by  these  ye 
might  be  partakers  of  the  divine  nature,  having  escaped  the  cor- 
ruption that  is  in  the  world  through  lust."  Inasmuch  then  as  the 
principle  of  grace  is  called  the  "  divine  nature,"  it  must  in  some 
respect,  at  least,  resemble  the  divine  nature.  But  what  is  this  ; 
or  what  is  the  nature  of  God  ?  Is  it  not  all  life,  all  activity,  all 
energy  and  power  ?  Is  it  not  at  the  furthest  possible  remove 
from  everything  dull,  sluggish  and  inactive  ?  Surely  it  is.  And 
if  a  principle  of  grace  is  anything  like  it,  it  must  be  a  principle 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS.  389 

immediately  tending  to  exert  itself  in  life  and  practice.  Besides, 
from  this  same  representation  of  the  principle  of  grace,  we  not 
only  learn  that  it  tends  to  practice  and  exertion  in  general,  but 
we  also  learn  to  what  particular  practice  it  tends.  For  being 
something  Hke  the  divine  nature  itself,  it  doubtless  tends  to  exert 
itself  in  llie  same  way  tliat  that  does.  But  how  is  that?  Are 
not  God's  ways  righteousness,  and  his  paths  holiness  ?  And  is 
it  not  the  very  tendency  of  the  divine  nature  to  exert  itself  in  acts 
of  holiness,  and  in  those  only  ;  or  to  maintain  one  continued 
course  of  holy  practice  ?  If  so,  we  may  safely  conclude  that  that 
principle  which  the  holy  Spirit  has  seen  fit  to  denominate  the  di- 
vine nature,  has  a  tendency  to  the  same  kind  of  exertion  and 
practice.  I  would  just  observe  further,  that  from  the  representa- 
tion of  the  nature  of  grace,  it  appears  that  it  has  a  native  tenden- 
cy so  to  exert  itself  in  holy  practice,  as  to  manifest  itself  very  visi- 
bly to  the  view  of  those  who  are  about  us.  This  we  know  is  the 
proper  tendency  of  the  divine  nature  itself,  and  that  it  actually 
has  this  effect.  Have  not  all  God's  attributes,  especially  his  ho- 
liness and  purity,  been  abundantly  exhibited  to  the  view  of  the 
world  in  the  works  of  creation  and  providence,  and  in  his  written 
revelation  ?  If  so,  then  the  like  tendency  also  has  the  principle 
of  divine  grace  in  the  hearts  of  believers. 

Again,  the  scriptures  also  represent  the  principle  of  divine  grace 
in  the  hearts  of  believers  to  be  the  image  of  Christ.  Col.  3:  10, 
"  And  have  put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed  in  knowledge, 
after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him  ;"  that  is,  of  Christ.  Yea, 
it  is  further  represented  to  be  Christ  himself  living  in  us.  Gal. 
2:  20,  ''  I  am  crucified  with  Christ :  nevertheless  I  live  ;  yet  not 
I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me."  Now  if  a  principle  of  grace  is  pro- 
perly called  the  image  of  Christ ;  yea,  Christ  himself  hving  in  us  ; 
it  must  needs  have  some  resemblance  to  the  character  of  Jesus 
Christ,  in  its  nature  and  tendency.  But  what  was  his  character  ? 
What  was  the  temper  and  spirit  of  his  mind  ?  Did  not  he  live 
in  the  practice  of  holiness,  as  well  as  profess  it  ?  Did  not  his 
whole  life  savor  of  it,  and  did  it  not  abundantly  manifest  itself  in 
all  his  conversation  ?  Did  not  his  light  truly  so  shine  before  men, 
that  they  might  see  his  good  works,  and  glorify  his  Father  who 
was  in  heaven  ?  The  holiness  and  spirit  of  piety  in  Christ  did 
not  lie  concealed  in  his  heart,  but  it  come  out  in  his  conduct ;  in 
every  part  of  his  conduct,  and  on  all  occasions  manifested  itself 
to  the  view  of  others.  And  so  a  principle  of  true  grace  tends  to 
the  same  in  every  one  who  is  indeed  possessed  of  it. 

Again,  the  scriptures  call  a  principle  of  grace  by  the  name  of  a 
seed.     1  John  3:  9,  "  Whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not  commit 


390  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS   FRUITS. 

sin,  for  his  seed  remaineth  in  him ;  and  he  cannot  sin  because  he 
is  born  of  God."  And  as  it  is  compared  to  a  seed,  so  we  may 
doubtless  judge  of  its  nature  by  the  nature  of  a  seed.  And  what 
is  the  nature  of  this  ?  Is  it  an  ever  dead  and  lifeless  thing,  which 
lies  always  concealed  in  the  ground  and  never  manifests  itself  by 
its  fruits  and  product  ?  How  far  otherwise  !  You  all  well  know 
that  it  is  the  nature  of  a  seed  to  grow,  to  spring  up  out  of  the 
ground  in  which  it  was  sown,  and  to  produce  a  living  plant  or 
tree,  and  finally  fruit,  both  of  which  are  visible,  and  standing 
proofs  of  the  goodness  of  the  seed  itself.  Now  as  the  holy  scrip- 
ture compares  a  principle  of  grace  to  this,  so  it  herein  teaches  us 
that  it  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  a  principle  of  grace,  not  to 
lie  concealed  in  the  heart,  as  though  it  were  dead,  but  to  produce 
such  fruit  in  our  practice  as  shall  be  a  clear  proof  of  its  existence 
within  us.  Otherwise  there  would  be  no  propriety  in  comparing 
it  to  a  seed  ;  and  the  comparison  would  not  tend  to  instruct  but 
to  deceive  us,  and  to  give  a  wrong  notion  of  the  nature  of  a  prin- 
ciple of  grace. 

Again,  another  thing  to  which  a  principle  of  true  grace  is  com- 
pared in  scripture  is  fire.  Matt.  3:  11,  "  I  indeed  baptize  you 
with  water  unto  repentance  ;  but  he  that  cometh  after  me  is 
mightier  than  I,  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to  bear ;  he  shall 
baptize  you  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  with  fire."  And  when 
the  Holy  Ghost  descended  upon  the  apostles  on  the  day  of  Pen- 
tecost, it  was  in  the  appearance  of  fire.  Acts  2:  3,  4,  "  And 
then  there  appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  like  as  of  fire,  and 
it  sat  upon  each  of  them."  And  Isaiah  42:  3,  "The  smoking 
flax  shall  he  not  quench."  Here  the  same  thing  is  compared  to 
a  very  small  fire,  or  to  a  fire  just  beginning,  v/hich  does  not  yet 
blaze,  but  has  just  begun  to  smoke.  But  what  is  the  nature  and 
tendency  of  fire  ?  Is  it  to  be  hid  and  concealed,  and  never  show 
itself  by  any  effects  ?  No  ;  quite  the  reverse.  We  all  know  it 
is  51  most  powerful  element  and  always  alive,  and  always  in  the 
actual  exercise  of  its  power.  This  liveliness  is  essential  to  its 
very  existence  ;  and  it  manifests  itself  in  two  ways.  First  it 
renders  it  visible,  or  manifest  to  the  sense  of  seeing.  It  natu- 
rally exhibits  a  bright  shining  light,  which  cannot  but  be  seen  by 
all  who  are  in  proper  circumstances  to  observe  it ;  and  in  this  it 
agrees  with  that  to  which  true  grace  is  compared  in  our  text.  It 
also  renders  itself  manifest  to  the  sense  of  feeling,  and  the  near- 
er we  approach  to  it  and  the  more  we  are  conversant  with  it,  the 
more  plainly,  does  it  manifest  itself  in  both  of  these  ways.  Now 
to  this  element  of  fire,  is  a  principle  of  true  grace  compared  in 
scripture  ;  and  does  not  this  plainly  teach  us  the  nature  of  such 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS.  391 

grace  ?  Does  it  not  hence  appear  to  be  of  a  lively,  vigorous  and 
active  nature,  always  tending  to  render  itself  manifest  by  its  pro- 
per fruits  and  effects  in  holy  practice  ?     It  doubtless  does. 

Again,  the  scriptures  compare  a  principle  of  divine  grace  to 
precious  ointment.  1  John  2:  20,  "  But  ye  have  an  unction 
from  the  Holy  One,  and  ye  know  all  things  ;"  and  verse  27,  "  But 
the  anointing  which  ye  have  received  abideth  in  you,  and  ye  need 
not  that  any  man  teach  yon  ;  but  as  the  same  anointing  teacheth 
you  of  all  things,  and  is  truth,  and  is  no  lie,  and  even  as  it  hath 
taught  you,  ye  shall  abide  in  him."  But  precious  ointment  is 
wont  to  render  itself  manifest  and  observable,  by  the  agreeable 
odor  and  sweet  smell  which  it  sends  forth  ;  and  with  which 
those  who  smell  it  are  wont  to  be  charmed  and  delighted.  In 
this  it  affords  a  proper  illustration  of  the  nature  of  true  grace  in 
the  heart.  This  also  is  wont  to  spread  abroad  its  visible  fruits 
and  effects  in  the  life  and  practice  of  holiness — a  life  which  is 
pleasing  and  acceptable  to  God. 

Again,  the  scriptures  compare  a  principle  of  true  grace  to  a 
spj'in^  of  living  water.  John  4:  14,  "  But  whosoever  drinketh 
of  the  water  that  I  shall  give  him,  shall  never  thirst,  but  the  wa- 
ter that  I  shall  give  him  shall  be  in  him  a  well  of  water  springing 
up  into  everlasting  life."  Now  you  all  know  that  such  a  spring 
or  fountain  of  water  is,  not  a  hidden,  covert  thing,  which,  as  to 
any  visible  effects  is  entirely  concealed.  On  the  contrary  it  flows 
forth,  and  produces  a  permanent  stream  which  is  a  standing  evi- 
dence of  its  real  existence.  And  so  it  is  with  the  principle  of 
true  grace.  The  nature  of  this  also  is  to  manifest  itself  in  a  con- 
tinued series  of  visible  and  gracious  fruits  in  the  life. 

Again  ;  a  principle  of  divine  grace  is  called  by  the  name  of 
spirit.  John  3:  6,  "  That  which  is  born  of  the  flesh,  is  flesh,  and 
that  which  is  born  of  the  spirit,  is  spirit ;"  and  Rom.  8:  4,  "  That 
the  righteousness  of  the  law  might  be  fulfilled  in  us,  who  walk 
not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  spirit."  But  what  is  there  of  a 
more  lively  active  nature,  and  what  is  more  disinclined  to  any 
dullness  or  inactivity  than  a  spirit  ?  Nothing  in  existence.  And 
so  it  is  with  a  principle  of  divine  grace.  This  also  is  of  the  same 
lively  and  active  nature.  And  all  dullness  or  sluggishness  is  en- 
tirely foreign  from  it.  And  as  spirit  is  of  such  an  active  nature, 
it  will  so  far  as  it  prevails  in  any  man,  display  itself  by  its  fruits 
in  his  life  and  conduct.  And  these  fruits  we  have  a  right  to 
look  for  and  to  expect  from  those  who  profess  to  be  possessed  of 
the  principle.  And  so  far  as  we  see  the  manifest  fruits  of  grace, 
so  far  we  are  bound  to  believe  that  there  is  the  principle.  But 
so  far  as  we  see  that  they  are  wanting,  so  far  we  have  a  right  to 


392  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 

suspend  our  judgment  and  withhold  our  charity.  This  is  per- 
fectly agreeable  to  our  manner  of  judging  in  the  affairs  of  com- 
mon life.  Whenever  we  see  a  neighbor,  in  all  his  conduct  busy 
and  active  and  producing  evident  marks  and  effects  of  his  activity 
in  all  that  he  undertakes,  we  immediately  judge  that  such  a  one 
is  not  a  lazy,  indolent  man  ;  but  that  he  is  possessed  of  an  active 
spirit ;  in  other  words  that  he  has  the  principle  of  activity  with- 
in. But  if  we  can  find  no  fruits  and  effects  of  a  man's  diligence 
and  activity,  then  however  he  may  profess  to  be  diligent  and  ac- 
tive, we  rightly  judge  him  to  be  dull  and  indolent.  So  unless 
we  see  those  who  profess  to  be  gracious,  living  according  to  their 
profession  and  exhibiting  the  proper  fruits  of  grace  in  their  lives 
and  conduct,  we  cannot  believe  that  they  really  have  grace  in 
their  hearts. 

I  would  only  observe  further  under  this  head,  that  the  nature 
of  a  principle  of  true  grace  is  also  manifest  by  what  is  said  in  2 
Tim.  3:  5,  "  Having  a  form  of  godliness,  but  denying  the  power 
thereof,"  Here  the  apostle  seems  to  call  true  grace  by  the  name 
of  the  power  of  godliness  ;  by  which  at  least  we  are  taught  that 
it  is  a  powerful  thing,  and  that  its  nature  and  tendency  are,  to 
produce  remarkable  effects  in  all  in  whom  it  is  implanted.  Thus 
it  may  appear  that  there  is  abundant  evidence  from  the  scripture 
account  of  a  principle  of  divine  grace,  that  its  nature  and  ten- 
dency are  to  operate  in  the  life  and  practice,  and  by  means  of  its 
holy  fruits,  to  manifest  itself  to  the  view  of  others. 

We  may  now  consider  this  doctrine, 

n.  With  reference  to  several  of  the  principal  graces  in  par- 
ticular, and  endeavor  to  show  that  their  nature  and  tendency 
are  the  same,  viz.  to  holy  practice.     Here  I  observe, 

1.  That  this  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  that  great  christian 
grace  faith.  Faith  in  its  proper  and  scriptural  sense,  is  a  cordial 
belief  of  the  truth,  or  a  reception  of  the  truth  of  the  gospel  and 
of  God's  word  in  general,  with  the  full  approbation  of  the  heart. 
And  in  this  general  notion  of  faith  are  included  especially  two 
things : 

(1)  A  firm  persuasion  and  full  conviction  of  the  truth  and 
reality  of  the  great  doctrines  revealed  in  God's  word.  Now  this 
persuasion  and  conviction  most  certainly  tend  directly  to  prac- 
tice, because  these  truths  deeply  concern  our  interest  and  affect 
our  happiness  or  misery.  If  they  are  real  truths  our  happiness 
or  misery  is  greatly  dependent  upon  them.  And  if  we  really  be- 
lieve them  to  be  true,  what  a  powerful  tendency  will  they  have 
so  to  put  us  upon  practice,  that  we  may  if  possible  secure 
the  one  and  avoid  the  other.     And  the  general  reason  why  man- 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FKUITS.  393 

kind  in  general  are  no  more  influenced  in  their  practice  by  the 
truths  of  God's  word,  is,  because  in  reality  they  do  not  reahze 
them,  or  in  a  reahzing  manner  believe  them  to  be  truths.  Did 
they  but  do  this,  somehow  they  would  be  greatly  influenced  in 
their  practice.  They  would  at  least  be  filled  with  concern  and 
anxiety,  so  as  to  break  ofl"  from  their  open  wickedness,  and  be  all 
attention  to  their  miserable  estate  and  to  the  duty  which  God  re- 
quires of  them.  This  we  find  to  be  the  case  with  mankind  in 
the  common  concerns  of  this  life.  Whenever  they  really  believe, 
that  is,  have  a  realizing  sense  that  a  given  course  of  conduct  is 
greatly  for  their  interest,  and  that  its  omission  will  certainly  ter- 
minate in  their  exceeding  great  loss,  dishonor  and  shame,  they 
are  at  least  filled  with  concern  and  anxiety  about  the  matter. 
And  if  in  any  such  case  they  are  not,  we  scruple  not  to  believe 
and  affirm  that  they  have  no  realizing  sense  of  the  things  which 
concern  their  interest.  Now  the  same  thing  holds  good  in  the 
affairs  of  religion.  If  men  really  believed  and  had  a  realizing 
sense  that  there  is  an  eternal  and  infinitely  good  God,  who  is  the 
creator  and  ruler  of  the  world,  and  takes  strict  notice  of  all  the 
conduct  of  his  rational  creatures  ;  if  they  were  fully  convinced 
that  they  are  in  the  hands  of  God  who  is  angry  with  them,  and 
are  daily  exposed  to  his  wrath  ;  if  they  were  firmly  persuaded 
that  there  is  an  eternal  world  of  endless  joy  or  misery  just  before 
them,  upon  which  they  must  shortly  enter,  and  that  there  is  no 
way  of  escaping  eternal  ruin  but  by  flying  to  Jesus  Christ  who 
offers  himself  to  become  a  Savior  to  all  who  will  accept  of  him  ; 
I  say  if  men  really  believed  these  things,  what  could  tend  more 
to  influence  them  in  their  practice  and  conduct  ? 

(2)  There  is  also  contained  in  true  saving  faith,  a  consent  and 
warm  approbation  of  the  heart  of  the  things  believed.  And  this  uni- 
ted with  the  forementioned  conviction  of  the  judgment,  the  whole 
becomes  a  principle  still  more  practical,  and  still  more  binding  to 
influence  the  life  and  conversation.  The  true  saint  not  only  be- 
lieves that  there  is  a  future  state  of  rewards  and  punishments,  but 
he  also  rejoices  in  it ;  is  charmed  with  the  prospect  of  the  happi- 
ness of  heaven,  and  fully  acquiesces  in  the  justice  of  the  torments 
of  hell.  He  not  only  believes  that  Jesus  Christ  is  come  in  the 
flesh  and  is  the  Savior  of  the  world,  but  also  rejoices  in  him,  in 
this  character,  and  his  soul  receives  him  as  his  Savior,  and  thus 
becomes  united  to  him.  Now  such  a  faith  as  this  more  especial- 
ly tends  to  practice  in  two  respects.  In  the  first  place,  it  sweeps 
away  all  those  objections  and  stumbling  blocks  which  are  in  the 
way  of  others,  and  which  tend  to  weaken  their  belief  of  the  truths 
of  the  gospel.     Men  who  have  no  cordial  consent  to  the  truth, 

Vol.  II.  34 


394  GRACE   EVIDENCED  BY  ITS   FRUITS. 

but  whose  hearts  wholly  oppose  it,  are  continually  raising  objec- 
tions against  it.     And  by  this  means   they  frequently  persuade 
themselves  into  the  disbelief  of  it ;  at  least  they  render  it  less 
practical  to  themselves,  and  are  much  less  influenced  by  it  in  their 
conduct.     But  a  true  saving  belief  of  the  truth  sweeps  away  all 
these  objections,  and  receives  the  truth  in  all  its  practical  power 
and  efficacy.     Again,  true  faith  more  especially  tends  to  practice, 
as  it  tends  to  fix  our  attention  upon  the  truths  believed.     If  we 
cordially  consent  to  any  truth  we  shall  delight  in  attending  to  it, 
and  in  meditating  upon  it,  and   shall  actually  have  it  very  much 
in  our  thoughts.     But  if  our   hearts  are  opposed  to  any  truth, 
even  though  we  do  believe   it,  yet  we  shall  endeavor  to  divert 
our  attention  from  fixing  and  dwelling  upon  it.     In  true  faith 
again,  there  is  not  only  a  cordial  reception  of  the  truths  of  the 
gospel  in  general,  but  in  particular  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  an  acqui- 
escence in  him  as  our  Lord  and  Savior.     And  to  receive  him  as 
our  Savior  is  to  receive  him  as   our  Savior  from  sin  ;  for  this  is 
the  view  in  which  he  offers  himself  to  us.     But  no  one  will  re- 
ceive a  Savior  from  sin,  until  he  is  disposed  and  really  desires  to 
be  delivered  from  it.     Why  should  he  fly  to  Christ  to  deliver 
him  from  that,  from  which  he  really  desires  not  to  be  delivered, 
but  which  he  eagerly  clings  to  and  embraces  ?     But  when  a  person 
is  really  sick  of  sin,  weary  and  heavy  laden  with  it,  then  and  not 
till  then  he  is  prepared  to  receive  a  deliverer  from  it,  and  he  is 
also  at  the  same  time  prepared  henceforth  to  forsake  it.     And 
such  a  disposition  of  mind  as  he  now  has,  tends  abundantly  to 
his  actually  forsaking  it  in  life  and  practice.     The   same  alsa 
may  be  observed  of  receiving  him  as  our  Lord  and  King.     If  we 
do  really  receive   him  cordially  and  willingly  as  our  Lord  and 
Master,  we  shall  willingly  submit  to  his  authority,  and  obey  his 
commands. 

2.  The  same  also  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  true  trust  and 
reliance  upon  God.  This  is  a  grace  which  is  much  insisted  on 
in  the  scriptures,  especially  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  it  is  great- 
ly inculcated  as  an  important  duty.  And  doubtless  if  we  do  real- 
ly confide  in  and  rely  upon  God,  and  make  him  the  object  of  our 
hope  and  trust,  we  shall  in  our  practice  be  governed  by  this  prin- 
ciple. Its  tendency  will  be  to  make  us  still  rely  upon  him  in  the 
midst  of  darkness  and  the  frowns  of  providence.  The  covenant- 
ing people  of  God  profess  to  trust  in  him  and  to  rely  upon  him 
as  their  supreme  good  and  best  portion.  And  as  they  make  such 
a  profession,  so  God  frequently  in  the  course  of  his  providence 
sees  fit  to  try  them,  whether  the  profession  which  they  make  be 
true  and  sincere.     For  this  purpose  he  cuts  off  their  hope  in 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 


395 


other  objects,  and  disappoints  their  trust,  and  brings  them  into 
great  trouble  and  affliction.     Now  in  such  circumstances  the  ten- 
dency of  a  false  trust  in  God  is  to  leave  us  to  murmuring  against 
God  and  finally  to  throw  us  into  despair.     But  the  trust  which 
is  true  and  genuine  will  still  support  us,  will  make  us  patient  and 
submissive,  and  will  lead  us  to  conduct  as  if  our  all  were  not  lost. 
For  if  God  be  indeed  our  supreme  good,  and  we  are  sure  he  lives, 
whatever  else  we  are  deprived  of,  we  shall  be  indifierent  about  it. 
Perfectly  agreeable  to  this  is  the  exhortation,  Is.  50:  10,  "  Who 
is  among  you  that  fearetli  the  Lord,  that  obeyeth  the  voice  of  his 
servant,  that  walketh  in   darkness  and  hath  no  light ?^^  Let  him 
trust  in  tlie  name  of  the  Lord,  and  stay  upon  his  God."     A  gra- 
cious trust  in  God  will  also  tend  greatly  to  influence  our  practice 
as  it  will  make  us  willing  to  trust  him  with  our  earthly  substance 
when  he  calls  for  it.     We   are  not  afraid  to  commit  our  earthly 
substance  into  the  hands  of  those  of  our  neighbors  in  whom  we 
have  full  confidence  that  they  will  deal  faithfully  with  it,  and  du- 
ly repay  it  to  us.     How  then,  if  we  have  any  trust  in  God,  shall 
we  be  unwilling  to  commit  the  same  to  him,  when  he  has  prom- 
ised abundantly  to  reward  us  both  here  and  hereafter? 

3.  The  same  also  is  the  tendency  of  that  capital  christian  grace 
true  love  to  God.     Love  is  eminently  a  practical  principle,  to- 
wards what  ever  object  it  be  directed.     What  else  is  it  but  love 
exercised  towards  various  objects  and  in  various  shapes  and  de- 
grees, which  governs  the  whole  world  of  mankind  ?     Whatever 
a  man  loves   and   sets   his   heart  upon,  that  in  proportion  to  the 
degree  of  his   love,  he   pursues  in   his  practice.     For  instance, 
those  who  set  their  hearts  on  riches  how  do  they  conduct  as  to 
their  practice  ?     Are  they  all  engaged  after  other  things,  at  the 
same  time  neglecting  all  opportunities  of  acquiring  the  wealth 
which  they  so  much  love  ?     Is  this  the  way  with  men  of  this  char- 
acter ?     It  is  well  known  to  be  far  otherwise.     It  is  well  known 
that  they  keep  their  eyes  still  fixed  upon  the  one  object  of  their 
pursuit,  and  so  regulate  all  their  conduct  as  tends  most  to  secure 
the  grand  thing  at  which  they  are  aiming.     So  also  if  men  set 
their  hearts  upon  honor ;  then  we  shall  find  them  so  regulating 
their  conduct  as  if  possible  to  obtain  this.     Or  if  they  very  ten- 
derly love  their  friends  or  their  near  relations ;  in  this  case  we 
shall  find  their  conduct  to  be  influenced  in  favor  of  those  whom 
they  love,  in  proportion  to  the  degree  of  their  love. 

Now  the  same  is  the  natural  eflfect  and  tendency  of  true  love 
to  God.  It  will  excite  us  in  our  life  and  practice  to  express  our 
love.  True  love  to  God  is  always  supreme.  And  if  we  love 
God  supremely,  that  is,  more  than  all  things  else,  it  will  tend  to 


396  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS, 

that  practice  whereby  we  shall  express  this  supreme  love.  All 
our  conduct  will  have  an  ultimate  respect  to  God,  to  his  service, 
and  to  his  honor  and  glory.  If  we  love  God,  we  shall  certainly 
love  his  laws  ;  for  these  are  an  expression  of  his  mind  and  will. 
And  if  we  love  his  laws,  we  shall  love  to  practise  them  ;  for  they 
all  respect  practice  and  strictly  enjoin  it.  John  14:  15,  "If  ye 
love  me,  keep  my  commandments  ;"  and  verse  21,  "  He  that  hath 
my  commandments  and  keepeth  them,  he  it  is  that  loveth  me  ; 
and  he  that  loveth  me  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father,  and  I  will 
love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  to  him."  And  the  same  thing 
is  abundantly  insisted  on  throughout  the  scriptures,  as  the  grand 
mark  by  which  we  both  know  concerning  ourselves  and  others, 
whether  we  have  any  true  love  to  God. 

Of  love  there  are  various  kinds,  or  rather  it  is  exercised  in  a 
variety  of  ways  which  are  distinguished  by  several  names.  One 
exercise  of  love  is  esteem,  whereby  we  prefer  God  and  choose 
him  before  all  things  else.  And  if  we  have  this  esteem  of  God 
it  will  tend  to  manifest  itself  when  other  things  come  in  compe- 
tition with  him.  When  it  comes  to  tiiis  that  we  must  either  have 
our  God  or  the  world,  our  God  or  our  honor,  our  God  or  our 
pleasure  and  ease,  we  shall  readily  choose  the  former,  and  reject 
the  latter.  Another  exercise  of  true  love  to  God  is  desire. 
Those  that  really  love  God,  desire  to  know  more  and  more  of  him 
in  order  that  they  may  love  him  more  and  more.  They  desire 
also  to  be  more  and  more  conformed  to  him.  This  is  expressed 
in  that  benediction  of  our  Lord,  "  Blessed  are  they  that  do  hun- 
ger and  thirst  after  righteousness."  This  is  the  true  character  of 
all  who  sincerely  love  God.  Now  strong  desire  is  a  powerful 
principle  of  action  and  practice.  Another  exercise  of  true  love 
to  God  is  joy  and  delight  in  him.  This  also  is  most  manifestly 
a  powerful  principle  tending  to  influence  the  life  and  practice. 

4.  I  come  now  to  consider  that  particular  christian  grace  which 
in  the  scriptures  is  called  by  the  name  of  repentance.  This  is 
a  grace  of  which  some  christians  seem  to  make  very  little  account. 
Yea,  they  hardly  esteem  it  a  grace  at  all  to  be  exercised  by  chris- 
tians, but  only  to  be  exercised  by  unrenewed  sinners.  But  quite 
contrarily  to  this  we  read  in  scripture,  of  "  repentance  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins,"  "repentance  unto  life,"  "  sorrowing  after  a  god- 
ly manner  ;"  which  expressions  surely  mean  something  not  to  be 
found  in  carnal  sinners.  This  repentance  consists  in  a  real  ha- 
tred and  abhorrence  of  all  sin,  or  a  turning  of  the  mind  from  it. 
The  word  in  the  New  Testament  which  is  most  frequently  trans- 
lated repentance,  most  properly  signifies  a  change  of  mind.  But 
when  the  mind  is  changed  from  one  thing  upon  which  it  was  be- 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS.  397 

fore  fixed  to  another,  the  practice  is  wont  also  to  be  changed. 
But  in  this  case  the  mind  is  changed  or  turned  from  sin.  Sin 
is  the  grand  object  upon  which  the  minds  of  natural  men  are 
fixed.  But  in  repentance  they  are  drawn  off  from  this,  and  are 
fixed  upon  quite  a  contrary  object,  viz.  holiness.  And  doubtless 
such  a  change  of  mind  has  a  most  direct  tendency  to  a  like  change 
in  practice.  We  find  it  to  be  so  in  all  other  cases.  Suppose  a 
man  who  has  hitherto  been  pursuing  a  certain  course,  now  has 
his  mind  with  respect  to  that  course  entirely  changed  ;  what  will 
be  the  effect  ?  Will  he  still  go  on  pursuing  the  same  course  ? 
Universal  experience  demonstrates  the  contrary,  viz.  that  hence- 
forth he  will  desist  from  it.  The  same  is  true  of  a  change  of  the 
mind  from  sin.  If  the  mind  be  turned,  why  should  not  the  man 
forsake  it  in  practice  ?  How  can  it  be  otherwise  ?  We  are  by 
no  means  wont  to  run  greedily  on  in  the  practice  of  that  which 
our  minds  hate  and  abhor. 

5.  I  would  also  consider  the  christian  grace  of  humility.  This 
tends  to  a  humble  walk  and  conversation  ;  and  whoever  is  pos- 
sessed of  it,  will  be  led  to  express  it  in  all  his  conduct  towards 
others.  Humility  is  a  thing  so  much  inculcated  and  so  peculiarly 
suited  to  the  christian  dispensation,  that  all  professing  christians 
hold  to  it  and  endeavor  the  most  of  them  to  make  a  show  of  it. 
But  some  are  much  put  to  it  even  to  put  on  any  tolerable  sem- 
blance of  it.  But  where  there  is  a  humble  spiri  twithin,  there  a 
humble  behavior  is  natural  and  easy.  We  find  that  men  of  a 
proud  and  haughty  spirit  are  very  apt  to  express  their  pride  in 
their  outward  conduct.  And  why  should  not  men  of  a  humble 
spirit  be  as  likely  in  the  same  way  to  express  their  humility  ?  A 
truly  humble  spirit  will  also  tend  to  express  itself  in  contentment 
in  the  circumstances  allotted  to  us  by  providence  ;  and  not  only 
so  but  also  to  rejoice  in  the  prosperity  of  others. 

6.  The  next  grace  that  I  would  mention  is  love  to  men.  This 
is  ever  connected  with  love  to  God,  and  like  that  will  flow  out 
in  holy  practice.  It  will  lead  us  to  assist  our  fellow  men  when 
in  difficulty,  to  compassionate  them  when  in  suffering,  and  to 
oblige  them  in  all  possible  things.  "  If  a  brother  or  sister  be  na- 
ked and  destitute  of  daily  food,"  it  will  lead  us  not  merely  to 
say  to  them,  "  depart  in  peace,  and  be  ye  warmed  and  filled," 
but  '^  to  give  them  those  things  which  are  needful  for  the  body." 
It  will  lead  us  to  suffer  long  and  be  kind,  to  forgive  others  as  we 
would  be  forgiven  by  our  heavenly  father.  And  whatever  may 
be  our  professions,  if  they  are  not  thus  sustained  and  their  sin- 
cerity evidenced  by  these  and  all  kindred  fruits,  we  are  but  de- 
ceiving ourselves. 

34* 


398  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 

7.  The  same  remarks  apply  to  the  christian  grace  of  gratitude. 
We  cannot  indeed  profit  God  by  our  thankfuhiess,  and  yet  we 
may  express  that  thankfuhiess  by  our  holy  obedience.  The  very 
sense  of  God's  mercies,  will  lead  us,  from  a  grateful  and  aflec- 
tionate  feeling,  to  endeavor  to  obey  him,  because  thus  we  know 
he  is  pleased  and  glorified.  As  the  subject  who  has  been  most 
highly  favored  by  his  prince,  can  and  will  find  ways  to  show  his 
thankfulness,  so  it  will  be  with  the  christian  to  whom  God  has 
shown  the  greatest  conceivable  favors. 

8.  Equally  true  is  all  this  of  the  christian  grace  of  hope.  This 
tends  to  wean  us  from  the  world,  for  it  is  always  pointing  us  for- 
ward to  another  state  of  existence.  If  we  have  true  hope,  it  will 
fix  our  desires  and  expectations  on  the  great  subjects  of  the  promi- 
ses. It  will  lead  us  to  look  for  our  highest  good  hereafter,  and 
as  a  consequence  to  think  but  lightly  of  the  things  of  this  world, 
and  to  live  as  pilgrims  and  strangers  here.  It  will  lead  us  also 
to  lay  up  our  treasure  in  heaven,  and  to  live  and  act  as  really  be- 
lieving it  to  be  there.  And  if  we  thus  live  by  faith,  and  as  hav- 
ing our  conversation  in  heaven,  this  surely  is  holy  practice. 

Thus  I  have  in  some  measure  finished  what  was  proposed,  viz. 
have  shown  that  it  is  the  nature  and  tendency  of  divine  grace  to 
manifest  itself  in  holy  practice,  and  that  the  same  is  true  of  each 
particular  one  of  the  christian  graces,  individually  considered. 
In  the  improvement  of  the  subject,  it  may  be  remarked, 

1 .  By  way  of  instruction,  that  we  may  see  the  reason  why  re- 
ligion is  so  much  dishonored  by  the  disorderly  walk  of  professors. 
It  is  because  it  is  so  eminently  a  practical  thing,  and  known  to 
be  so  by  all.  But  if  they  see  those  who  profess  this  religion  not 
practising  accordingly,  they  are  ready  to  believe  there  is  nothing 
in  it,  or  at  least  that  there  is  nothing  in  their  profession.  And, 
indeed,  what  else  could  be  expected  ?  And  by  what  else  beside 
actions  can  man  judge  ?  How  important  then  that  "  every  one 
that  nameth  the  name  of  Christ  should  depart  from  all  iniquity," 
and  "  shun  the  very  appearance  of  evil,"  and  seek  in  all  things 
to  walk  worthy  of  the  christian  vocation  ! 

2.  In  the  use  of  examination,  let  us  ask,  in  view  of  this  sub- 
ject, what  have  been  our  lives  ?  Many  of  us  have  made  a  pro- 
fession of  religion,  have  told  of  a  great  change  of  our  sentiments 
and  feelings,  and  of  new  and  perhaps  extraordinary  views  of  God 
and  Christ,  of  the  grace  of  the  gospel,  of  the  joys  of  heaven  and 
the  torments  of  hell.  But  have  we  lived  accordingly  ?  Have  we 
lived  in  obedience  to  God,  in  faith  on  Christ,  in  the  purifying 
hope  of  the  gospel,  and  as  realizing  the  blessed  and  fearfiil  real- 
ities of  the  unseen  world  ?     And  not  only  toward  God,  but  to- 


GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS.  399 

Ward  our  fellow  men,  have  we  lived  answerably  to  the  great  change 
we  profess  to  have  experienced  ?  We  arc  all  doubtless  sensible 
that  we  come  short  in  these  things.  But  are  we  contented  to 
come  short,  flattering  ourselves  that  we  are  christians,  and  there- 
fore resolving  to  hope  at  any  rate,  no  matter  what  may  be  our 
conduct  ?  This  ought  not  to  be  ;  for  this  is  not  the  nature  of 
true  grace.  True  grace,  in  all  our  short-comings,  vrill  be  attend- 
ed by  four  things  which  may  evidence  its  sincerity.  If  we  indeed 
possess  it, 

(1)  We  shall  at  least  be  desirous  of  being  holy.  Some  do 
not  desire  to  be  holy.  The  safety  of  the  christian  they  desire, 
but  they  care  not  for  his  holiness.  But  if  we  are  true  christians 
we  shall  eagerly  desire  to  be  holy.  We  shall  strive  for  holiness, 
using  to  this  end  all  the  means  of  grace,  working  out  our  salva- 
tion with  fear  and  trembling. 

(2)  We  shall  be  grieved  that  we  come  short  of  perfect  and 
entire  obedience  and  holiness.  The  spirit  will  ever  be  working 
against  the  flesh.  It  will  be  our  grief  and  burden  that  we  so  of- 
ten sin  against  God.  And  with  the  apostle  we  shall  often  be 
ready  to  cry  out,  "  O !  wretched  man  that  I  am,  who  shall  de- 
liver me  from  the  body  of  this  death." 

(3)  We  shall  ever  feel  our  dependence  on  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  lie  low  at  the  throne  of  grace  asking  for  divine  strength. 
At  the  throne  of  grace  we  shall  feel  is  our  proper  place  ;  and  the 
more  we  see  our  own  deficiencies  and  weakness,  the  more  con- 
stantly and  humbly  shall  we  cast  ourselves  on  God  for  assistance, 
and  for  grace  to  help  in  every  time  of  need. 

(4)  We  shall  make  progress.  If  we  are  truly  possessed  of 
grace,  our  path  will  be  "  as  the  shining  light  growing  brighter 
and  brighter  to  the  perfect  day."  Now  clouds  may  be  about  us, 
and  now  mists  may  gather  upon  our  way,  but  on  the  whole  we 
shall  go  forward.  From  period  to  period  we  shall  find  that  we 
are  growing  in  grace,  and  becoming  more  and  more  like  Christ. 

3.  The  last  use  I  would  make  of  this  subject,  is  that  of  exhor- 
tation.    And, 

(I)  It  exhorts  sinners  at  once  to  enter  on  the  practice  of  holi- 
ness. It  is  the  service  of  God  to  which  you  are  called  ;  and  will 
you  not  enter  it  ?  He  is  your  creator,  and  has  he  not  a  right  to 
your  services  ;  your  sovereign,  and  does  he  not  demand  them  ; 
your  constant  benefactor,  and  are  you  not  bound  by  every  tie  of 
gratitude  to  render  them  ?  If  you  refuse  to  obey,  you  will  go  on 
to  live,  as  you  are  now  living,  in  the  service  of  satan  and  sin. 
And  is  not  God's  service  better  than  these  ?  Will  it  not  give 
you  more  joy  and  happiness  here,  and  be  better  rewarded  here- 


400  GRACE  EVIDENCED  BY  ITS  FRUITS. 

after  ?     By  every  duty  then  here,  and  by  every  prospect  hereaf- 
ter, are  you  not  bound  to  enter  it,  that  your  souls  may  hve  ? 

(2)  It  also  exhorts  those  who  are  saints.  The  cause  of  God 
is  at  stake,  and  how  much  will  it  be  dishonored  by  unfaithfulness 
on  your  part !  Many  are  ready  to  disbelieve  all  religion  ;  and 
your  conduct  may  do  much  to  remove  their  doubts  and  convince 
them  of  the  reality  and  excellence  of  your  faith,  or  to  impede 
their  progress  and  place  stumbling  blocks  in  their  way  over  which 
they  may  fall  and  perish.  Your  own  character  as  christians,  and 
even  as  men  of  truth  and  honor,  are  involved.  You  profess  great 
things,  and  your  profession  has  been  public  and  most  solemn.  It 
is  a  sacrament ; — an  oath.  Be  diligent  then,  that  you  walk  wor- 
thy of  your  high  and  holy  calling,  and  that  you  put  no  occasion 
of  stumbling  or  falling  in  the  way  of  others.  "  Finally,  brethren, 
whatsoever  things  are  true,  whatsoever  things  are  honest,  what- 
soever things  are  just,  whatsoever  things  are  pure,  whatsoever 
things  are  lovely,  whatsoever  things  are  of  good  report ;  if  there 
be  any  virtue,  and  if  there  be  any  praise,  think  on  these  things." 
Thus  "  shall  your  light  so  shine  before  men,  that  they  shall  see 
your  good  works,  and  glorify  your  father  which  is  in  heaven." 


SERMON   XXVI. 


TIIE  GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL.* 

1  TiMOTHV  1 :  11. — "  The  glorious  Gospel  of  tJie  blessed  God." 

To  celebrate  the  gospel,  is  the  universal  practice  of  all  who 
profess  the  christian  name.  Those  who  cannot  endure  the  law, 
will,  in  the  fullest  and  strongest  terms,  commend  the  gospel ; 
and  those  who  openly  declare  that  they  cannot  away  with  an  ab- 
solute God,  are  most  lavish  of  their  praises  of  a  merciful  Redeem- 
er. Even  those  who  are  at  sword's  points  in  almost  everything 
else,  yet  agree  in  this,  to  speak  highly  of  the  gospel  and  of  the 
Savior.  They  all  agree  that  it  is  a  glorious  gospel,  and  that  he 
is  a  glorious  Savior. 

But  how  and  why  is  this  ?  Is  it  that  the  gospel  and  the  true 
character  of  the  Savior  are  things  agreeable  to  the  natural  taste 
and  relish  of  the  hearts  of  men,  which  yet  are  at  enmity  against 
God,  and  not  subject  to  his  law  ?  Or  is  the  gospel,  rightly  un- 
derstood, any  more  agreeable  to  the  corrupt  heart  of  man  than 
the  law  is  ;  or  the  character  of  Jesus  the  Savior,  than  the  char- 
acter of  God  the  lawgiver  and  judge  ?  No  ;  if  we  consult  the 
apostle  we  shall  find  that  these,  viz.  the  law  and  the  gospel,  God  the 
father  and  lawgiver  and  Christ  the  Son  and  Savior,  are  in  no  wise 
opposed  to  each  other,  but  are  in  all  things  perfectly  harmonious 
and  consistent.  For,  says  he,  "  Do  we  then  make  void  the  law 
through  faith,"  i.  e.  through  the  gospel  ?  And  the  answer  which 
he  himself  directed  by  inspiration  gives,  is,  "  God  forbid  ;  yea, 
we  establish  the  law."  The  law  and  the  gospel,  therefore,  ac- 
cording to  the  apostle,  are  not  at  all  opposed  to  each  other,  but 
being  built  on  the  same  foundation,  do  mutually  establish  each 
other.  Again,  the  same  apostle  speaking  of  Jesus  the  Savior, 
says,  that  "  he  is  the  brightness  of  the  father's  glory,  and  the  ex- 
press image  of  his  person."  But  if  he  is  such  a  perfect  image  of 
the  father,  surely  those  must  act  a  very  inconsistent  part  who  love 
and  rejoice  in  the  image,  while  they  have  no  complacency  in,  but 
hate  and  reject  the  original.     And  the  same  is  true  of  those  who 

*  Preached  in  1771. 


302 


GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


rejoice   in  the  gospel  which  establishes  the  law,  and  yet  hate  and 
oppose  the  law  itself. 

From  these  things  it  appears  that  although  all  who  would  call 
themselves  christians  agree  to  speak  highly  of  the  gospel  and  of 
the  Savior,  and  to  call  them  a  glorious  gospel  and  a  glorious  Sa- 
vior, yet  it  may  be  with  many  through  misapprehension  of  their 
real  nature,  and  of  what  constitutes  their  glory.  That  for  which 
they  love  the  gospel  and  love  the  Savior,  and  which  they  call 
their  glory,  inasmuch  as  it  is  opposed  to  the  law  and  the  charac- 
ter of  God  the  father,  is,  in  reality,  not  the  true  glory  of  the  gos- 
pel, and  of  the  Savior,  but  something  which  they  falsely  so  call. 
That  the  gospel  and  the  glory  of  it  are  not  inconsistent  with  the 
law  is  evident,  not  only  from  the  passages  already  quoted,  but 
from  many  others  ;  as  Rom.  10:  4,  "  Christ  is  the  end  of  the  law 
for  righteousness  to  every  one  that  believeth,;"  and  Gal.  3:  24, 
"  The  law  is  our  schoolmaster  to  bring  us  to  Christ,"  These  pas- 
sages plainly  show  that  the  law  is  subservient  to  the  gospel  ;  and 
on  the  other  hand  that  the  gospel  is,  as  to  its  spirit,  though  not 
as  to  the  letter,  a  fulfilment  of  the  law.  The  glory  of  the  one, 
therefore,  cannot  be  inconsistent  with  the  other.  Now  that  the 
gospel  is  indeed  a  glorious  gospel,  our  text,  as  well  as  the  whole 
of  the  New  Testament  informs  us.  Let  us,  then,  inquire  where- 
in consists  its  glory  ?  It  consists,  I  reply,  namely  in  two  things, 
the  display  that  it  makes  of  God's  character,  and  the  provision 
that  it  makes  for  man. 

I.  The  gospel  is  a  glorious  gospel,  inasmuch  as  in  it  every 
one  of  the  divine  attributes  is  set  forth  in  a  most  glorious 
light. 

This  is  true  both  of  the  natural  attributes  of  God,  and  also  of 
his  moral. 

1.  It  is  true  of  the  natural  attributes  of  God.  The  natural 
attributes  of  God,  considered  as  an  infinite  intelligence,  are  his 
power,  and  knowledge  or  wisdom.  And  both  these  are  abun- 
dantly glorified  in  the  plan  of  the  gospel. 

(1)  The  infinite  power  of  God,  was  gloriously  displayed  in 
the  work  of  creation  ;  in  producing  out  of  nothing  the  heavens 
and  the  earth,  the  sun  and  moon  and  stars,  the  beasts  of  the  field 
and  the  fowls  of  the  air  and  the  fishes  of  the  sea,  and  especially 
in  producing  rational  intelligences,  mankind  with  all  the  hosts  of 
heaven,  angels  and  archangels,  thrones  and  dominions  and  prin- 
cipalities and  powers.  Few  more  sublime  conceptions  of  power 
can  be  conceived  than  that  of  the  Psalmist,  "  He  spake,  and  it 
was  done  ;  he  commanded,  and  it  stood  fast."  The  production 
of  a  universe,  and  that  by  a  word,  was  indeed  a  glorious  display 
of  power  that  is  infinite. 


GLORY  OP  THE  GOSPEL.  303 

But  a  far  more  glorious  display  of  that  power  has  been  made, 
and  especially  at  the  final  consummation  of  all  things  will  have 
been  made,  in  the  prosecution  of  the  plan  of  the  gospel.  In  the 
creation  of  the  universe,  there  was  no  opposition  and  resistance, 
at  least  none  of  a  moral  kind,  for  God's  power  to  overcome.  As 
opposed  to  the  plan  of  the  gospel,  however,  there  is  all  the  re- 
sistance that  can  possibly  be  made  by  earth  or  hell.  In  every 
sinner  who  is  converted  from  the  error  of  his  ways  to  the  wis- 
dom of  the  just,  God  has  to  overcome  the  utmost  opposition  that 
that  soul  can  make  to  his  work  within  it.  In  no  degree  is  such 
a  one  inclined  by  nature  to  fall  in  with  this  work  of  God  for  his 
salvation,  but  to  resist  it ;  for  the  carnal  mind  is  ever  enmity 
against  God  and  all  true  holiness,  and  can  only  be  made  willing 
in  the  day  of  his  power.  And  not  only  is  the  sinner  himself  op- 
posed to  this  work  of  grace,  but  it  is  also,  to  the  utmost  degree 
of  their  might,  opposed  by  the  powers  of  darkness,  the  devil  and 
his  angels,  the  prince  of  the  power  of  the  air  and  all  his  hosts. 
And  the  reason  why  it  is  opposed  by  these,  is,  because  by  it  their 
kingdom  is  assailed,  and  one  of  their  subjects  is  likely  to  be  taken 
from  them,  and  brought  into  the  kingdom  of  God's  dear  Son. 
And  as  there  is  opposition  to  the  work  of  divine  grace  in  the  in- 
stance supposed,  from  the  powers  of  darkness,  so  there  is  in  every 
instance  where  any  step  is  taken  by  God  to  carry  out  the  designs 
of  the  gospel.  And  this  for  the  same  reason  as  has  just  been 
given,  viz.,  that  in  every  such  step  their  kingdom  is  attacked  and 
shaken. 

Nor  is  this  opposition  small  or  contemptible  ;  for  these  spirits, 
however  fallen  and  depraved,  yet  are  of  vast  power  and  ability, 
so  that  they  are  called  in  scripture  "  principalities  and  powers." 
And  especially  is  this  true  of  their  leader,  who  is  called  "  Luci- 
fer," "  the  sun  of  the  morning  ;"  intimating  that  before  his  fall 
he  was  as  much  distinguished  among  the  heavenly  hosts,  as  the 
morning  star  is  among  the  stars  of  the  firmament.  And  although 
he  and  all  those  that  apostatized  with  him  lost  their  holiness  and 
moral  rectitude,  yet  they  lost  not  their  natural  power  and  strength. 
Now  all  this  their  power  has  ever  been  opposed  to  God  the  Fa- 
ther, and  his  Son  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  the  sanctifier, 
in  every  step  of  the  work  of  redemption  ;  and  yet  by  them  it  has 
always  been  overcome.  It  is  overcome  in  the  conversion  of  every 
sinner,  and  in  the  progressive  sanctification  of  every  saint.  It 
was  overcome  most  gloriously  in  the  complete  triumph  which  Jesus 
Christ  gained  over  these  powers  of  darkness,  in  the  signal  victory 
wiiich  he  achieved  on  the  cross.  It  has  been  and  will  be  over- 
come in  every  revolution  brought  to  pass  in  the  world  in  favor  of 


404  GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

the  church,  and  will  finally  be  completely  and  forever  overcome 
In  the  consummation  of  all  things,  when  Christ  shall  have  "  put 
all  enemies  under  his  feet."  Thus  it  would  appear  that  the  pow- 
er of  God  is  abundantly  more  displayed  and  more  glorified  in  the 
work  of  redemption  according  to  the  plan  of  the  gospel,  than 
even  in  the  work  of  creation. 

(2)  The  same  is  also  true  with  respect  to  the  knowledge  or 
wisdom  of  God.  A  truly  divine  display  of  the  knowledge  and 
wisdom  of  God  is  indeed  given  in  the  works  of  creation  ;  in  con- 
triving the  vast  machine  of  the  universe  ;  in  ordering  the  sun 
and  moon  and  stars  in  their  proper  places  ;  in  causing  them  to 
observe  their  appointed  times  and  seasons,  so  that  summer  and 
winter,  seed-time  and  harvest  should  never  cease  ;  and  in  adapting 
all  the  works  of  nature  to  their  proper  end.  But  who  will  pre- 
tend to  say  that  herein  knowledge  and  wisdom  are  equally  dis- 
played as  in  the  plan  of  the  gospel  ?  The  latter  is  represented 
in  scripture  as  far  surpassing  the  wisdom  and  comprehension  of 
angels.  The  apostle  Peter  speaking  of  the  aflTairs  of  the  gospel, 
says,  "  Which  things  the  angels  desire  to  look  into  ;"  which 
shows  plainly  that  angels,  with  all  their  vast  capacities  and  eager 
desires  to  know,  cannot  fathom  the  depths  of  wisdom  displayed 
in  the  gospel.  And  the  apostle  Paul  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Ephe- 
sians,  says,  "  To  the  intent  that  now  unto  the  principalities  and 
powers  in  heavenly  places,  might  be  known,  by  the  church,  the 
manifold  wisdom  of  God."  And  if  this  wisdom  is  to  be  known 
to  the  angels  only  by  the  church,  that  is  by  the  display  of  it  in 
the  application  of  the  work  of  redemption,  then  it  is  manifest, 
that  before  such  display,  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  investigate 
and  comprehend  it,  and  therefore  that  in  its  fulness  it  was  not  dis- 
played. 

And  the  same  thing  is  most  manifest  in  reflecting  on  any  part 
of  this  plan.  For  instance,  who  would  ever  have  imagined  that 
if  we  had  once  rebelled  against  God,  it  could  be  possible  for  us 
to  be  readmitted  to  his  favor  ?  Or  if  it  had  been  known  that  this 
was  possible,  who  could  have  determined  in  what  way  it  might 
be  brought  to  pass  ?  Who  would  have  imagined  that  it  could  be 
by  the  incarnation  of  God's  own  Son  ?  Or  if  this  had  been  known, 
who  could  have  determined  what  he  should  do,  or  how  he  should 
prepare  the  way  for  God  to  be  reconciled  to  us,  and  for  our  re- 
turn to  him  ?  Who  would  have  thought  of  his  death  as  being  a 
proper  expedient  to  this  end  ?  These  things  utterly  surpassed 
the  wisdom  of  man  or  angels  to  determine,  and  thus  to  surmount 
the  difficulties  that  stood  in  the  way  of  our  salvation. .  Yet  all 
these,  to  creatures  insurmountable  difficulties,  were  easily  over- 


GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 


405 


come  by  the  infinite  wisdom  of  God.  He  contrived  a  way  in 
which  he  could  be  just  and  yet  the  justifier  of  every  one  that  be- 
lieveth  in  Jesus.  And  therefore  Christ  is  said  by  the  apostle  to 
be  not  only  the  ''power,"  but  "the  wisdom"  of  God.  Having 
thus  endeavored  to  show  very  briefly  how  God's  natural  perfec- 
tions, his  power  and  knowledge  or  wisdom  are  displayed  in  the  plan 
of  the  gospel,  I  would  now,  as  proposed,  proceed  to  show  the  same, 
2.  With  regard  to  his  moral  perfections.  These  are  common- 
ly reckoned  to  be  his  holiness,  justice,  goodness  and  truth.  On 
each  of  these  I  would  dwell  for  a  moment. 

(1)  By  the  holiness  of  God,  we  are  to  understand  the  moral 
purity  of  the  divine  nature,  and  its  freedom  from,  and  opposition 
to  all  sin.  Or  we  may  call  it  God's  love  of  righteousness  and 
hatred  of  iniquity.  After  man  had  fallen  it  was  a  question  which 
would  have  forever  perplexed  both  men  and  angels,  how  God 
could  forgive  sin  without  appearing  friendly  to  it,  and  giving  it 
not  only  toleration  but  countenance.  Yet  a  way  of  doing  this 
God  has  found  out  and  put  in  practice  in  the  plan  of  the  gospel. 
For  since  Christ  has  undertaken  to  make  an  atonement  for  sin 
and  has  suffered  the  penalty  which  was  justly  threatened  against 
it,  and  since  when  he  took  the  guilt  on  himself,  God  spared  him 
not,  but  freely  gave  him  up  to  death,  and  poured  out  upon  him 
the  vials  of  his  wrath,  it  appears  in  the  most  glaring  colors  that 
he  is  far  very  far  from  the  least  disposition  to  befriend  sin,  or  even 
to  countenance  or  tolerate  it.  For  if  this  were  the  case,  why  did 
he  not  spare  his  own  Son  when  he  took  the  sinner's  place,  and 
save  him  from  the  threatened  penalty  of  the  law  ?  Doubdess 
if  God  were  disposed  to  tolerate  sin  and  remit  the  punishment 
due  to  it  in  any  case,  he  would  have  done  it  in  this.  And  for 
him  to  give  up  his  own  Son  who  is  the  brightness  of  his  glory 
and  the  express  image  of  his  person,  who  is  infinitely  beloved  and 
infinitely  dear  to  him,  is  more  than  for  him  to  have  cast  off  the 
whole  world.  So  that  in  the  sufferings  of  Christ  there  is  a  more 
abundant  testimony  borne  against  sin  than  there  would  have  been 
if  all  mankind  had  been  cast  off  forever.  The  holiness  of  God, 
then,  is  abundantly  displayed  and  glorified  in  the  plan  of  the  gos- 
pel.    The  same  is  true, 

(2)  Of  the  divine  attribute  of  justice.  The  justice  of  God 
requires  that  he  should  maintain  equity  in  all  his  dealings  with  his 
creatures,  and  that  he  render  to  every  one  according  to  his  de- 
sert ;  and  particularly  that  he  be  just  in  maintaining  the  rights 
of  the  Godhead,  and  by  no  means  suffering  any  injury  done  to 
his  honor  and  law  to  go  unpunished.  And  these  demands  of 
justice  are  all  satisfied  and  answered  in  the  way  of  the  gospel. 
Vol.  H.  35 


406  GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

For  the  dishonor  done  to  the  dignity  and  law  of  God  is  fully  vin- 
dicated in  the  sufferings  of  Christ,  so  that  now  no  injustice  is  done 
to  God  though  the  sinner  be  acquitted.  The  same  will  be  found 
to  hold  good, 

(3)  Of  the  divine  attribute  of  truth.  God  from  the  beginning 
threatened  death  to  the  violator  of  his  holy  law.  "  In  the  day 
thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  surely  die."  Now  the  truth  of 
God  requires  that  this  threatening  be  executed.  If  it  be  not  ex- 
ecuted, what  becomes  of  his  truth  ?  Accordingly  it  was  executed, 
to  the  fullest  extent ;  not  indeed  literally  on  man  himself,  but  on 
his  surety  and  substitute,  so  that  to  all  intents  and  purposes  the 
demands  of  the  law  are  answered  and  satisfied,  and  God's  word 
performed.  The  threatening  which  he  had  denounced  was,  that 
sin  should  be  punished  with  death.  And  so  strictly  did  he  ad- 
here to  this  threatening  and  to  his  word  herein,  tliat  he  would 
not  set  it  aside  even  to  save  the  life  of  his  own  Son.  Rather 
than  that  his  truth  should  fail,  his  own  well  beloved  Son,  who  is 
dearer  to  him  doubtless  than  thousands  of  angels,  even  he  dies 
in  anguish  on  the  cross !  We  need  not  then  scruple  to  say  that 
God's  truth  is  more  glorified  in  the  plan  of  the  gospel,  than  it 
would  have  been  if  the  sentence  of  the  law  had  been  literally  ex- 
ecuted ;  that  is,  it  more  demonstratively  appears  that  God  will  in 
no  case  fall  from  the  word  that  has  gone  forth  from  his  lips. 
Once  more  I  remark  that  the  same  is  true, 

(4)  Of  the  divine  attribute  of  goodness.  The  goodness  of 
God,  and  especially  that  exercise  of  it  which  we  call  mercy,  is 
most  gloriously  displayed  in  the  gospel.  This,  indeed,  is  what 
none,  I  think,  will  deny,  however  they  may  deny  the  same  as  to 
the  several  other  attributes  which  have  been  mentioned ;  and 
therefore  I  need  not  dwell  much  upon  the  proof.  The  whole 
dispensation  of  the  gospel,  from  beginning  to  end,  is  a  most  won- 
derful display  of  goodness  and  mercy,  and  such  a  display  as 
could  not  have  taken  place  on  any  other  plan.  Had  it  not  been 
for  the  gospel,  God  could  never  have  had  the  glory  of  forgiving 
rebels,  or  of  doing  such  things  for  their  salvation  as  he  has  done 
in  giving  his  only  Son  to  be  a  propitiation  for  their  sins.  Herein 
it  appears  that  he  is  willing  to  show  mercy  to  the  vilest  of  sinners, 
to  those  that  have  rebelled  against  him,  and  contemned  his  law, 
and  despised  his  authority,  and  abused  his  grace,  and  trampled 
on  the  blood  of  his  Son.  And  that  God  could  or  would  show 
such  mercy,  even  to  the  most  ill-deserving,  how  could  it  have 
been  manifest  but  by  the  gospel  ?  It  could  not  have  been. 
There  could  not  have  been  an  opportunity  thus  to  have  showed 
mercy,   had  not  man  fallen,  and  the  gospel  dispensation  been 


GLORY  OF  THE   GOSPEL.  407 

provided  for  his  recovery.  And  thus  that  gospel,  in  the  senti- 
ment of  the  apostle,  indeed  displays  "  the  riches"  of  the  divine 
goodness. 

Thus  we  have  in  some  measure  considered  what  was  at  first 
proposed,  viz.  that  the  gospel  is  glorious  inasmuch  as  in  it  every 
attribute  of  God  is  set  in  a  tnost  glorious  and  conspicuous  light. 
And  not  only  so,  but  those  attributes  which  seemed  to  be  wholly 
inconsistent  in  their  exercise  toward  mankind,  are  now  shown  to 
bo  entirely  consistent  and  perfectly  harmonious.  In  accordance 
with  this  the  Psahnist  observes,  that  "  Mercy  and  truth  are  met 
together,  and  righteousness  and  peace  have  kissed  each  other." 
Had  it  not  been  for  the  gospel,  truth  would  have  forever  appeared 
inconsistent  with  mercy,  and  righteousness  with  peace  or  pardon. 
But  now  in  the  gospel,  these,  and  all  the  divine  attributes  are 
perfectly  harmonized,  so  that  God  is  glorified  by  it ;  and  in  this 
it  appears  that  the  gospel  as  a  dispensation  is  divinely  glorious. 

II.  The  gospel  is  also  a  glorious  gospel,  inasmuch  as  in  it 
full  provision  is  made  for  the  free  pardon,  in  consistency  with 
the  obedience  of  the  sinner,  and  at  the  same  time  his  obedience 
is  secured  in  a  way  that  is  consistent  with  the  free  pardon  of 
his  sins. 

This  is  frequently  made  an  objection  against  the  gospel,  or 
rather  against  this  notion  of  the  gospel  that  it  consists  in  the  free 
pardon  of  the  sinner,  "  that  it  encourages  licentiousness,  and  dis- 
courages and  lays  not  a  sufficient  foundation  for  obedience." 
But  that  this  objection  is  without  foundation  will  appear  on  a  lit- 
tle reflection  ;  and  it  will  also  appear  that  quite  the  contrary  is 
the  truth,  viz.  that  there  is  the  most  abundant  security  for  obedi- 
ence to  the  divine  law.  For  the  offer  of  the  gospel  is  the  offer 
of  pardon  to  every  one  that  believes  on  Christ,  and  to  none  but 
such.  Our  Lord  himself  declares,  "  He  that  believeth  on  the 
Son  hath  everlasting  life :  and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall 
not  see  life  ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him."  Now  to 
believe  on  Christ  and  to  accept  of  him  as  our  Savior,  and  heartily 
to  approve  of  him  as  such,  as  a  person  of  infinite  holiness  and 
purity,  implies  some  degree,  at  least  of  true  holiness  in  us.  A 
person  who  is  wholly  destitute  of  holiness  and  wholly  sunk  in  sin, 
can  never  approve  of  and  cordially  acquiesce  and  rejoice  in  an- 
other of  perfect  and  consummate  holiness.  But  if  faith  in  Christ 
implies  a  holy  temper,  this  is  the  proper  and  only  principle  from 
which  all  true  obedience  springs  and  which  naturally  leads  to  it. 

Again,  in  receiving  and  believing  in  Christ,  who  is  the  express 
image  of  the  Father,  and  who  has  done  all  that  he  has  done  in 
the  work  of  redemption  to  honor  God  and  promote  his  glory. 


408  GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

there  is  evidently  implied  approbation  of  God  the  Father,  and 
his  holiness  and  glory.  Otherwise  we  could  not  approve  of  Christ 
wherein  he  approves  of  the  Father.  And  further,  Christ  has 
magnified  the  law,  and  made  it  honorable,  both  by  his  active  obe- 
dience and  his  dying  to  sustain  it.  And  to  receive  and  acquiesce 
in  such  a  Savior  implies  that  we  also  have  a  heart  to  approve  and 
honor  and  obey  the  same  law.  Thus  faith  in  Christ  implies  a 
foundation  in  the  heart  for  love  to  God,  and  also  for  love  to  his 
law  and  a  cordial  obedience  thereto.  And  he  that  is  the  subject 
of  true  faith,  has  this  foundation  laid  in  him.  So  that  justification 
by  faith  in  Christ,  so  far  from  discouraging  from  obedience,  ne- 
cessarily secures  it. 

I  might  go  on  to  mention  several  other  virtues  for  which  this 
way  of  salvation  lays  a  foundation  ;  particularly  humility,  meek- 
ness, patience,  forgiveness  and  brotherly  love.  To  be  sensible 
that  we  are  saved  only  through  the  righteousness  of  another,  and 
are  continually  dependent  on  him,  naturally  tends  to  expel  pride 
and  inspire  humility  in  the  soul.  To  believe  in  a  Savior  who 
patiently  endured  such  things  as  Christ  did  for  us,  naturally  tends 
to  inspire  with  patience.  The  consideration  of  the  forgiveness 
of  our  sins  through  Christ,  and  of  the  fact  that  we  are  united  in 
one  mystical  body  with  our  christian  brethren,  has  the  like  ten- 
dency, if  our  hearts  are  indeed  right  with  God,  to  excite  in  us  a 
forgiving  spirit  toward  our  enemies,  and  sincere  brotherly  love 
towards  all  the  true  disciples  of  the  Savior.  But  these  things  I 
have  only  time  to  mention.  The  mere  mention  of  them,  how- 
ever, is  enough,  I  presume,  to  show  that  in  these  respects,  as  in 
the  others  that  have  been  stated,  the  plan  of  the  gospel  has  no 
tendency  to  discourage  from  obedience  to  the  divine  law,  but  on 
the  contrary  effectually  secures  that  obedience  in  all  who  comply 
with  it. 

I  have  thus  endeavored  to  show  that  the  gospel  is  a  glorious 
gospel,  because  in  it  every  divine  attribute,  whether  natural  or 
moral,  is  most  eminently  displayed  ;  and  also  because  it  renders 
the  free  pardon  of  sin  consistent  with  the  obligation  of  the  law  in 
those  who  comply  with  it,  and  at  the  same  time  secures  in  all  such 
a  holy  life.     In  the  improvement  of  the  subject  I  remark, 

1.  If  the  gospel  be  indeed  so  glorious  a  gospel  as  appears  from 
what  has  been  said  in  the  present  discourse,  then  we  may  see 
how  highly  favored  we  are  in  enjoying  the  revelation  of  it. 
The  revelation  of  the  gospel  is  so  famihar  to  multitudes  that  they 
seem  to  esteem  it  no  favor,  no  privilege  at  all.  But  let  such  con- 
sider what  their  state  would  have  been  if  they  had  lived  under 
the  dim  light  of  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  or  in  the  deep 


GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL.  409 

darkness  of  heathenism  ;  or  wliat  it  would  have  been  if  there  had 
been  no  plan  of  reconciliation  between  God  and  tnan  revealed. 
And  by  dsvellin<i;  on  these  things,  let  them  learn  suitably  to  prize 
the  gospel  and  all  its  privileges. 

2.  If  the  gospel  be  so  glorious  and  excellent,  then  let  us  all  be 
exhorted  to  make  it  the  object  of  constant  and  close  attention 
and  study.  You  remember  the  good  report  which  the  noble 
Bereans  obtained  by  this  very  thing.  They  are  left  on  eternal 
record  as  praised  of  God  for  searching  the  scriptures  daily.  Let 
us  then  follow  their  example  which  is  so  strongly  commended  to 
our  imitation.  To  do  this  we  are  also  encouraged  by  the  exam- 
ple of  the  angels  themselves.  They,  as  the  apostle  Peter  express- 
ly declares,  desire  to  look  into  these  things  ;  they  make  them  the 
objectof  their  continual  meditation  and  investigation.  The  study 
of  the  gospel  is  an  angelic  and  heavenly  study.  And  truly  it  is 
in  every  respect  a  most  noble  study,  even  to  the  bright  and  holy 
intelligences  of  heaven.  Its  subjects  are  the  most  noble  and 
grand  in  the  universe,  and  the  most  pleasing  and  delightful 
to  those  who  have  a  taste  for  them.  They  afford  constant  de- 
light and  entertainment  to  all  the  hosts  of  heaven,  both  saints 
and  angels,  and  will  afford  the  same  to  all  who  shall  be  so  happy  as 
hereafter  to  arrive  at  that  blessed  world  ;  and  as  Christ,  through 
eternal  ages,  shall  unfold  their  mysteries,  and  display  their  inex- 
haustible riclies  and  glories,  they  shall  be  endless  sources  of  in- 
struction and  delight,  filling  the  soul  with  joys  that  are  unspeak- 
able and  full  of  glory. 

And  not  only  is  the  study  of  the  scriptures  an  entertaining  and 
noble  employment,  but  it  is  as  useful  as  it  is  agreeable.  It  is  use- 
ful for  every  class  of  men,  both  saints  and  sinners.  It  is  one  of  the 
principal  means  of  awakening,  conviction  and  conversion  to  those 
who  are  careless  and  secure  in  their  sins.  What  can  have  a  more 
powerful  tendency  this  way,  than  for  sinners  to  peruse,  and  as  in 
the  very  presence  of  God  to  meditate  on  the  most  solemn  and  in- 
teresting truths  of  the  gospel  ?  And  though  there  be  no  absolute 
promise  to  the  sinner  while  he  remains  such,  yet  the  experience 
of  all  ages  shows  that  while  thus  seriously  perusing  and  attending 
to  the  solemn  truths  of  the  gospel,  he  is  in  the  most  likely  way 
that  he  can  be  in,  to  obtain  the  saving  grace  of  God.  Therefore 
for  sinners  to  neglect  these  means  of  grace,  is  to  act  most  unwise- 
ly and  presumptuously,  and  highly  to  provoke  a  gracious  God. 

And  as  the  study  of  the  gospel  is  thus  useful  for  sinners,  so  it 
is  also  for  saints.  As  it  is  a  means  of  awakening  and  conviction 
to  the  former,  so  it  is  of  comfort,  establishment  and  edification  to 
the  latter.     By  attending  to  the  gospel,  they  will  learn  more  of 

35* 


410  GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL. 

God  and  his  sovereignty,  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  wonderful  grace 
and  love  to  men,  of  their  own  vileness  in  themselves  and  their 
dependence  on  the  Holy  Spirit.  And  these  views  will  have  a 
powerful  tendency  to  fill  their  hearts  with  adoration  and  thank- 
fulness for  the  grace  of  the  gospel,  and  with  humility  and  self- 
abasement  for  their  own  sinfulness  and  short-comings,  and  will 
lead  them  to  place  less  dependence  on  themselves,  and  more  on. 
Jesus  Christ.  Attention  to  the  gospel  is  also  a  powerful  means 
of  weaning  the  heart  from  the  world  and  the  things  of  it,  and  of 
fixing  the  affections  on  things  that  are  above.  It  makes  the  way 
of  duty  plain,  and  unfolds  the  dangers  of  temptation,  and  arrays 
before  the  individual  every  motive  to  walk  in  the  one  and  guard 
against  the  other.  It  continually  points  to  eternal  realities,  so  as 
to  make  them,  as  it  were,  present,  and  thus  leads  us  to  live  as 
"  seeing  things  invisible,"  having  "  our  conversation  in  heaven." 
And,  in  short,  in  every  respect  it  is  a  most  powerful  means  of 
promoting  the  sanctification  of  the  saints,  and  their  growth  in 
grace.  Those,  therefore,  who  neglect  this  noble  and  divine  em- 
ployment of  attending  diligently  to  the  gospel  of  Christ,  are  whol- 
ly inexcusable,  and  so  they  will  find  it  in  the  last  great  day. 

3.  Let  us  take  occasion  from  this  subject  to  inquire  whether 
we  have  complied  with  this  glorious  gospel  ?  To  comply  with 
the  gospel  is  to  believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Now  many 
have  something  which  they  suppose  to  be  faith,  and  yet  which 
falls  far  short  of  the  reality.  Let  us  then  examine  as  to  our  faith. 
And  in  so  doing  we  may  try  it  by  the  following  signs  : 

(1)  If  our  faith  be  genuine  we  shall  receive  Christ  with  a  cor- 
dial approbation  of  the  holiness  of  his  character,  as  well  as  of  his 
grace  and  mercy.  We  shall  esteem  him  as  a  Savior  from  the  in- 
fluence as  well  as  from  the  condemnation  of  sin,  and  as  much  de- 
sire to  be  saved  by  him  from  the  former  as  the  latter.  To  do 
otherwise — to  approve  of  his  grace  and  mercy,  and  not  of  his  ho- 
liness, is  to  divide  those  things  that  in  their  nature  are  insepara- 
ble, and  thus  to  prove  that  our  faith  is  spurious. 

(2)  If  our  faith  is  genuine,  we  shall  receive  and  approve  of 
Christ  in  every  part  of  his  character,  and  in  all  his  relations  to  us. 
We  shall  approve  of  him  as  our  prophet  to  instruct  us,  and  shall 
delight  in  all  his  instructions.  We  shall  approve  of  him  as  our 
priest,  expecting  and  desiring  salvation  only  through  the  blood  of 
his  atonement.  We  shall  approve  of  him  as  our  king,  and  de- 
light in  all  his  laws  and  commands,  endeavoring  to  live  faithfully 
according  to  them. 

(3)  If  our  faith  be  genuine,  we  shall  bring  forth  fruits  meet 
for  it.     It  will  be  our  delight  to  live  a  life  of  holiness,  and  also 


GLORY  OF  THE  GOSPEL.  411 

the  object  of  our  constant  endeavor.  And  our  profiting  herein 
will  doubtless  in  a  greater  or  less  degree  appear  unto  all  men. 
Thus  we  shall  show  our  faith  by  our  works  ;  which  if  we  do  not, 
in  vain  shall  we  flatter  ourselves  with  the  imagination,  that  wc 
are  believers  ;  in  vain  shall  we  expect  a  share  in  the  charity  of 
men  here,  or  the  divine  favor  hereafter.  It  is  forever  true  that 
"without  holiness  no  man  shall  see  the  Lord." 

4,  If  the  gospel  be  so  glorious,  how  inexcusable  will  be  all 
those  who  comply  not  with  it.  The  greater  its  glory,  the  great- 
er the  obligation  on  all  to  accept  its  offers.  And  how  justly  will 
God  be  provoked  with  those  who  finally  refuse  to  comply  with  its 
demands  and  accept  its  grace  !  Such  a  refusal  implies  a  contempt 
not  only  of  the  gospel  but  of  the  law,  not  only  of  Christ  our  Sa- 
vior but  of  God  the  father,  a  contempt  on  the  one  hand  of  the 
mercy  of  eternal  life,  and  on  the  other  of  the  woes  of  eternal 
death.  It  implies  the  basest  ingratitude,  and  the  darkest  guilt. 
It  will  but  prepare  those  who  are  chargeable  with  it,  to  hear  at 
last  from  God,  "  Because  I  have  called,  and  ye  refused  ;  I  have 
stretched  out  my  hand  and  no  man  regarded  ;  but  ye  have  set  at 
nought  all  my  counsel  and  would  none  of  my  reproof,  I  also  will 
laugh  at  your  calamity  ;  I  will  mock  when  your  fear  cometh  ; 
when  your  fear  cometh  as  desolation  and  your  destruction  as  a 
whirlwind  ;  when  distress  and  anguish  cometh  upon  you."  There- 
fore let  all  repent  of  this  their  impenitence  and  unbelief,  and 
"  pray  God  if  perhaps  the  thought  of  their  heart  may  be  forgiv- 
en." "  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and  the  unrighteous 
man  his  thoughts  ;  and  let  him  return  unto  the  Lord,  and  he  will 
have  mercy  upon  him  ;  and  to  our  God,  for  he  will  abundantly 
pardon." 


SERMON   XXVII. 


THE  BROAD  WAY.* 

Matthew  7 :  13. — ■"  Enter  ye  in  at  fJie  strait  gate ;  for  uncle  is  the  gate 
and  broad  is  the  way  that  Itadeth  to  destruction,  and  many  there  be  which  go 
in  thereat.^'' 

These  words  were  uttered  by  our  Lord  in  his  sermon  on  the 
mount.  They  contain  an  exhortation,  with  an  enforcement.  The 
exhortation  is  "  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate  ;"  this  is  what  he 
would  have  all  his  hearers  do.  What  the  strait  gate  is,  appears 
by  the  next  verse,  viz.  the  gate  which  openeth  into  life  ;  "  strait 
is  the  gate  and  narrow  is  the  way  which  leadeth  unto  life."  The 
argument  which  our  Savior  uses  to  enforce  this  exhortation  is 
this  :  '*  for  wide  is  the  gate  and  broad  is  the  way  Vv^hich  leadeth 
to  destruction,  and  many  there  be  which  go  in  thereat."  This 
argument  or  enforcement  has  a  double  force  ;  lying  partly  in  what 
is  implied  and  plainly  understood,  and  partly  in  what  is  expressed. 

The  thing  implied  is  this,  that  there  is  no  middle  passage 
between  the  strait  gate  with  its  narrow  way,  and  the  wide  gate 
with  its  broad  way  ;  and  that  if  men  do  not  enter  in  through  the 
former  into  life,  they  must  unavoidably  enter  through  the  latter 
into  the  broad  way  which  leadeth  to  destruction.  So  that  our 
Lord  virtually  tells  his  hearers  that  as  they  would  avoid  destruc- 
tion, and  as  they  value  their  immortal  souls  and  eternal  life,  they 
must  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate. 

What  is  expressed  in  this  enforcement,  is  what  our  Lord  ob- 
serves of  the  gate  and  way  that  lead  to  destruction  ;  that  the 
gate  is  wide,  and  the  way  broad.  By  this  he  would  let  us  know 
the  danger  there  is  that  we  shall  enter  in  at  this  gate,  and  walk 
in  this  way.  For  whenever  there  are  two  gates,  the  one  so  wide 
as  to  admit  of  an  easy  entrance,  and  the  other  so  small  and  strait 
that  it  cannot  be  entered  without  great  toil  and  labor,  men  are 
strongly  tempted  and  much  exposed  to  enter  the  former  and  pass 
by  the  latter.  So  also  when  there  are  two  ways  or  roads,  the 
one  broad  and  plain  and  well  beaten,  the  other  narrow  and  ob- 

*  First  preached  in  1768. 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  413 

scure  and  difficult  to  find  ;  men  are  apt  to  pass  on  in  the  fornner 
heedless  of  the  latter.  Our  Lord  would  also  make  us  further  sen- 
sible of  this  danger  by  the  consequence  which  actually  takes 
place  ;  that  "  many  there  be  wliich  go  in  thereat."  While  the 
strait  gate  and  narrow  way  which  lead  unto  life  are  heedlessly 
passed  by  and  trodden  by  very  few,  thousands  and  thousands 
crowd  into  the  wide  gate  and  drive  along  the  broad  and  plain  and 
easy  way  which  leadcth  to  destruction. 

In  further  speaking  from  these  words,  I  would  1.  Show  what 
the  destruction  is  that  is  spoken  of  in  our  text ;  2.  In  what  re- 
spects the  gate  is  wide  ;  3.  How  we  are  to  understand  the  ex- 
pression that  many  go  in  thereat ;  4.  Give  some  reasons  why  so 
many  go  in  at  the  wide  gate  by  the  broad  way  to  destruction  ; 
and  5.  Urge  by  way  of  improvement  the  counsel  of  Christ  in 
the  text. 

I.  /  am  to  show  what  the  destruction  is  which  is  spoken  of 
in  the  text. 

There  are  two  kinds  of  destruction.  One  is  that  of  which  the 
subject  is  not  sensible.  This  is  annihilation,  wherein  something 
is  turned  into  nothing,  or  entirely  ceases  to  exist.  In  this  sense 
the  souls  of  brute  creatures  are  supposed  to  be  destroyed  at  their 
death,  so  as  utterly  to  sink  into  nothing.  In  this  destruction  they 
suffer  no  pain  or  distress.  In  what  precedes  it  they  may,  but  in 
the  destruction  itself  they  are  wholly  insensible  either  of  pain  or 
pleasure. 

Now  if  this  were  the  destruction  to  which  mankind  are  liable, 
it  would  not  be  wonderful  that  they  should  be  careless  and  un- 
concerned about  it.  For  in  this  case  they  would  have  no  know- 
ledge of  the  evil  which  they  suffered  in  being  destroyed ;  nor 
would  they,  in  non-existence,  feel  the  loss  which  they  had  sustain- 
ed. But  their  destruction  is  a  far  more  terrible  thing  than  this. 
It  is  a  sensible  destruction,  or  a  destruction  of  which  the  subject 
is  conscious  at  the  same  time  that  he  suffers  it.  It  consists  in  a 
sensible  abolishment  of  whatever  pertains  to,  or  concerns  the  ra- 
tional creature's  well  being  and  happiness.  It  is  a  destruction 
which  is  universal,  total  and  perfect,  which  does  not  affect  a- 
person's  welfare  merely  in  one  or  in  many  respects,  but  in  all. 
His  welfare  and  happiness  of  every  kind  are  utterly  abolished, 
and  all  that  pertains  to  them.  And  not  only  so  but  the  very  per- 
fection of  the  contrary  misery  takes  place. 

The  happiness  or  good  of  a  rational  creature  may  be  considered 
as  consisting  in  two  things  :  excellence  of  nature  and  disposition, 
and  comfort  and  pleasure  enjoyed.  The  excellence  of  his  nature 
and  disposition  is  his  spiritual  conformity  to  the  image  of  God. 


414  THE  BROAD  WAT. 

Now  with  respect  to  this  good  of  excellence,  mankind  are  all  by 
nature  already  destroyed  ;  for  "  they  are  dead  in  trespasses  and 
sins."  There  are  however  remaining  certain  natural  principles 
which  fit  them  for  social  life  and  render  them  agreeable  to  them- 
selves and  their  neighbors.  But  in  this  universal  destruction, 
even  these  will  be  destroyed.  The  same  will  be  the  fate  also  of 
all  comfort  and  pleasure,  arising  from  any  outward  good  things 
of  life  or  from  any  agreeable  enjoyments  whatsoever.  All  com- 
fort and  happiness  shall  be  forever  removed,  and  the  creature 
crushed  under  the  weight  of  misery,  insomuch  that  all  strength 
and  joy  and  hope  shall  be  entirely  and  forever  gone.  Thus  the 
soul  like  a  vessel  will  be  emptied  of  all  good  and  filled  with  com- 
plete misery — misery  which  will  fully  occupy  every  part  of  its 
capacity.  This  is  that  universal,  total  and  perfect  destruction  of 
the  rational  creature  of  which  we  have  spoken  ;  and  this  is  the 
destruction  meant  in  our  text.  This  also  is  the  destruction,  which 
is  the  proper  "wages  of  sin,"  and  the  fruit  of  the  vengeance  of 
God  the  creator  against  the  creature  that  dares  rebel  against  him. 
This  is  the  death  threatened  in  the  law.  This  is  the  destruction 
of  hell,  or  the  death  of  the  damned,  that  is,  the  second  death. 
This  is  infinitely  more  terrible,  infinitely  more  to  be  dreaded, 
than  any  partial  destruction  which  can  be  suflTered  in  life ;  yea, 
than  death,  or  even  annihilation  itself. 

II.  JVe  come  now  to  consider  in  what  respects  the  gate  is 
ivide,  and  the  way  broad  which  leadeth  to  destruction. 

1.  The  gate  is  wide  in  this  respect,  that  there  is  no  difficulty 
in  finding  it.  The  passage  is  so  wide  that  it  cannot  escape  no- 
tice. It  lies  open  to  fair  view,  insomuch  that  one  cannot  open 
his  eyes  without  seeing  it.  It  is  not  at  all  in  this  respect  like  the 
gate  that  opens  into  life.  This  cannot  be  found  without  great 
care  and  attention.  It  is  so  small  and  strait  a  gate  that  if  men 
are  not  very  diligent,  and  if  they  do  not  search  with  all  care  and 
application,  there  is  danger  of  their  never  finding  it.  And  many 
who  suppose  themselves  to  have  found  it,  do  but  deceive  them- 
selves, mistaking  for  it  what  is  only  some  by-path  of  the  broad 
way  which  leadeth  to  destruction.  The  utmost  care  and  diligence 
therefore  are  needful  in  order  to  find  the  strait  gate,  and  to  walk 
in  the  truly  narrow  way.  But  in  order  to  find  the  wide  gate  and 
to  keep  in  the  broad  way,  nothing  is  wanting  but  to  walk  onward 
without  the  least  care  or  concern.  For  all  are  by  nature  already 
in  that  way  ;  and  all  that  is  necessary  for  their  finding  the  gate 
that  opens  into  destruction,  is,  that  they  walk  straight  forward  in 
the  way  in  which  they  already  are.  Yea,  further,  this  gate  is  so 
wide,  that  it  can  be  easily  found  in  the  dark.     Those  who  dwell 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  415 

in  the  midnight  darkness  of  heathenism,  with  the  utmost  ease 
walk  on  in  the  broad  way,  and  without  difficulty  enter  in  at  the 
wide  gate  ;  whereas  the  strait  gate  is  scarcely  to  be  found  and 
the  narrow  way  scarcely  to  be  followed  even  in  the  blazing  sun- 
shine of  gospel  light.  This  broad  gate  is,  as  it  were,  as  wide  as 
the  wide  world  itself.  Instead  of  being  hard  to  find,  it  is  hard  to 
miss  it ;  insomuch  that  go  which  way  you  will,  there  is  the  great- 
est danger  of  entering  in  thereat ;  and  it  is  avoided  by  none  but 
the  few,  the  happy  few,  who  walk  with  great  toil  and  difficulty 
in  the  narrow  way.  "  If  the  righteous  are  scarcely  saved,  where 
will  the  ungodly  and  the  sinner  appear  ?" 

2.  This  way  is  broad  also,  in  this  respect,  that  men  may  take 
many  different  courses  and  yet  all  be  in  it.  There  is  such  a 
latitude  in  the  way,  that  it  allows  of  men's  going  in  many  very 
different  directions,  and  yet  all  shall  keep  in  the  way,  and  all  at 
last  arrive  at  and  pass  through  the  same  wide  gate.  There  are 
millions  of  different  passages,  all  of  which  belong  to  this  broad 
way  ;  and  some  are  found  in  one  and  some  in  another.  Some 
choose  to  enter  into  the  wide  gate  by  a  course  of  "rioting  and 
drunkenness,  chambering  and  wantonness,"  giving  themselves  up 
to  open  luxury  and  debauchery.  Others  choose  to  walk  in  a 
course  of  covetousness  and  worldly-mindedness  which  equally 
leads  to  the  same  dark  end.  Some  choose  the  road  of  open  pro- 
faneness  and  impiety.  Others  are  better  pleased  with  the  covert, 
disguised  ways  of  lying  hypocrisy.  Some  are  wholly  intent  upon 
the  pleasures  of  animal  nature.  Others,  to  the  no  small  mortifi- 
cation of  these,  bend  their  whole  force  to  the  pursuit  of  the  empty 
bubbles  of  honor  and  ambition.  Thus  men  in  these  and  a  thou- 
sand other  instances  cross  each  others  track,  and  thwart  one 
another  in  their  different  courses,  while  yet  they  are  all  travelling 
the  same  general  broad  way,  which  leadeth  to  destruction. 

And  not  only  is  this  true  with  regard  to  different  persons,  but 
one  and  the  same  person  may  alter  his  course  and  take  at  times, 
very  different  paths,  and  still  keep  in  the  broad  way.  In  that 
way  there  is  room  enough  to  wander,  now  to  take  this  path  and 
now  that,  so  that  one  may  go  therein  in  a  very  crooked  course. 
And  in  this  manner  he  may  go  to  destruction.  He  may  make 
many  changes  and  alterations  in  his  conduct,  sometimes  pursuing 
one  vain  object  and  sometimes  another.  Now  he  may  be  all  en- 
gaged in  this  course  of  darling  delights,  and  now  he  may  change 
it  for  another  which  equally  leads  to  the  same  destruction. 

3.  This  way  is  broad  also  in  this  respect,  that  the7-e  is  need  of 
very  little  resistance  and  violence  to  be  used  in  order  to  go  for- 
ward therein.     In  any  narrow  way  there  is  need  of  pressing  and 


416  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

violence  in  order  to  get  along.  So  it  is  in  the  narrow  way  which 
leadeth  unto  life.  Hence  the  remark  of  our  Lord,  "  And  from 
the  days  of  John  the  Baptist  until  now,  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
suffereth  violence,  and  the  violent  taketh  it  by  force ;"  and 
again,  "  Strive  to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate,  for  many,  I  say  unto 
you,  shall  seek  to  enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able."  But  in  a 
broad  and  spacious  way  men  find  room  to  get  along  without  dif- 
ficulty. And  thus  it  is  in  the  way  that  leads  to  destruction. 
There  is  little  or  no  difficulty  or  opposition  met  with  by  those  who 
tread  therein.  At  some  times  indeed  their  conscience  may  smite 
and  reproach  them,  and  fill  them  with  fears  for  the  future;  but 
they  soon  sear  it,  and  again  go  on  unmolested.  Notwithstanding 
all  the  crowds  of  men  which  travel  this  way,  yet  is  there  space 
sufficient  for  them  all  to  pass  on  without  stopping  or  pressing  one 
against  another.  The  way  is  broad  and  the  gate  wide  enough 
to  admit  them.  None  have  need  to  stop  a  moment  for  want  of 
room  to  proceed.  They  meet  too  with  little  or  no  opposition  in 
travelling  this  road  ;  for  it  is  agreeable  to  their  natural  temper 
and  depraved  disposition.  It  leads  as  it  were  down  hill,  whither 
their  own  weight  will  carry  them.  It  is  down  a  strong  current 
and  a  man  may  sleep  and  yet  be  hurried  swiftly  along  to  death. 

III.  We  come  now  to  the  next  thing  proposed,  which  is  to 
consider  how  we  are  to  understand  the  expression  "  many  there 
be  ivhich  go  in  thereat." 

Plainly  it  implies  these  two  things, 

1.  That  the  number  is  very  great  if  we  consider  what  propor- 
tion they  bear  to  the  whole  ivorld  of  mankind.  By  far  the 
greater  part  of  mankind  so  far  as  we  can  judge  go  in  at  this  wide 
gate.  And  so  it  has  been  in  all  ages.  How  was  it  in  the  old 
world  ?  We  read  of  very  few  that  avoided  it.  Some  indeed  of 
the  posterity  of  Seth  are  supposed  to  have  walked  in  the  narrow 
way,  while  the  rest  of  the  world  went  in  the  broad  way  that  lead- 
eth to  destruction.  In  like  manner  after  the  flood,  we  read  of 
but  very  few  concerning  whom  we  have  any  evidence  but  that 
they  entered  in  at  the  wide  gate.  And  even  among  the  chosen 
seed  of  Abraham,  but  here  and  there  one  is  spoken  of  as  "  fear- 
ing God  and  walking  in  his  commandments  ;"  while  the  whole 
nation  is  called  "  a  rebellious  house,"  "  a  stiflf-necked  and  hard- 
hearted people,  who  grieved  the  Lord  and  erred  in  their  heart, 
not  having  known  his  ways."  And  the  same  has  also  been  the 
case  with  the  world  since  Christianity  has  been  introduced.  Very 
few  in  comparison  with  the  whole  of  mankind  have  forsaken  the 
broad  way,  and  entered  through  the  strait  gate  into  life.     But, 

2.  What  our  Lord  here  says,  also  implies  that  the  number  of 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  417 

those  who  enter  in  at  the  wide  gate  is  very  great  compared  even 
with  the  whole  nimiber  that  have  the  instruction  and  counsels 
of  God's  word.  How  small  is  the  number  of  those,  who  give 
any  evidence  of  their  title  to  life,  even  in  the  land  where  the  gos- 
pel is  preached  !  "  Many  are  called  but  few  are  chosen."  Many 
arc  invited  to  forsake  the  dangerous  broad  way  and  fly  from  the 
wide  gate.  But  alas  !  how  few  are  there  who  hearken  to  the  di- 
vine call  and  obey  the  divine  invitation.  The  number  is  also 
great  if  compared  with  the  number  of  those  who  hope  to  enter 
into  life.  Most  of  those  who  live  under  the  light  of  the  gospel 
entertain  a  hope  that  they  shall  at  last  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate 
and  obtain  the  possession  of  eternal  life.  And  the  most  of  tliem 
are  also  deceived  ;  insomuch  that  with  full  expectation  they  shall 
finally  seek  to  enter  in  and  shall  not  be  able.  To  the  question, 
"  Are  there  iew  that  be  saved?"  our  Savior  replied,  "  Strive  to 
enter  in  at  the  strait  gate,  for  many,  I  say  unto  you  will  seek  to 
enter  in,  and  shall  not  be  able.  When  once  the  master  of  the 
house  is  risen  up  and  hath  shut  to  the  door,  and  ye  begin  to  stand 
without  and  to  knock  at  the  door,  saying,  Lord,  Lord,  open  unto 
us  ;  and  he  shall  answer  and  say  unto  you,  I  know  you  not, 
whence  you  are  :  Then  shall  ye  begin  to  say,  we  have  eaten 
and  drunk  in  thy  presence,  and  thou  hast  taught  in  our  streets. 
But  he  shall  say  unto  you,  I  know  you  not,  whence  you  are  ;  de- 
part from  me  all  ye  workers  of  iniquity."  We  come  now  as 
proposed, 

IV.  To  give  some  reasons  why  so  many  go  in  at  the  wide 
gate,  by  the  broad  way  leading  to  destruction. 

The  reasons  which  I  shall  mention  are  those  which  have  a 
special  respect  to  such  as  live  under  the  light  of  the  gospel. 
These  reasons  may  be  summed  up  in  the  two  mentioned  in  the 
text  and  the  following  verse  ;  viz.  the  wideness  of  the  way  lead- 
ing to  destruction,  and  the  narrowness  of  the  way  of  life.  The 
way  of  life  is  narrow  on  account  of  the  many  trials  and  tempta- 
tions to  be  met  with  in  travelling  it.  There  are  many  rough 
places  in  this  way,  where  is  required  the  utmost  effort  and  the 
exertion  of  every  power  in  order  to  get  along  therein.  And  the 
greatest  obstacle  and  hindrance  of  all,  is  the  individual's  own 
heart,  and  the  opposition  which  arises  from  within.  These  things 
make  the  way  of  life  as  it  were  a  continual  ascent.  Even  the 
christian  is  like  one  rowing  against  the  stream.  He  has  need  of 
constant  and  vigorous  exertion  ;  and  if  he  slackens  his  stroke  he 
is  carried  backward  in  the  swifi  current  driving  him  towards  the 
wide  gate  of  destruction.  And  still  more  others,  who  have  never 
yet  entered  upon  the  narrow  way,  seeing  these  things,  and  know- 

VoL.  H.  36 


418  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

ing  that  to  enter  in  they  must  part  with  all  their  darling  sinful 
delights,  find  no  heart,  no  willingness  to  any  of  these  things,  but 
a  perfect  opposition  thereto.  And  this  is  the  reason  why  they 
still  keep  on  in  the  broad  way  to  destruction.  Not  to  insist,  how- 
ever, on  the  more  general  reasons  which  are  obviously  contained 
in  our  text  and  context,  I  shall  endeavor  to  point  out  some  other 
things  which  are  the  particular  occasions  or  ways  in  which  multi- 
tudes are  ruined  and  led  down  to  destruction.     And, 

1.  The  first  occasion  of  this  kind  which  I  shall  mention,  is, 
that  in  general  little  or  no  pains  are  taken  with  children  when 
young  for  the  good  of  their  souls,  by  those  who  have  care  of 
their  education.  The  minds  of  children,  while  they  are  young, 
are  tender  and  easily  affected  by  solemn  truths,  if  seasonably  set 
before  them.  These  truths  if  instilled  into  them  in  early  years, 
have  a  most  lasting  and  abiding  effect.  Hence  that  proverb  of 
Solomon,  "  Train  up  a  child  in  the  way  he  should  go,  and  when 
he  is  old  he  will  not  depart  from  it."  Not  that  I  would  insinuate 
that  if  parents  should  faithfully  discharge  their  duty  to  their  chil- 
dren, this  would  be  sufficient  to  give  them  a  saving  knowledge 
of  the  truth,  without  the  divine  agency  in  regeneration.  But  that 
this  is  the  more  common  and  ordinary  way  in  which  God  is 
pleased  to  bestow  his  grace.  That  knowledge  which  would  be 
thus  communicated  to  children  by  the  faithful  instructions  of  their 
parents,  would  be  a  great  restraint  upon  them,  keeping  them  back 
from  running  into  evil  habits  and  abandoned  and  loose  lives.  Those 
who  should  be  thus  educated  would  not  immediately  (as  others) 
run  into  open  sin,  with  carelessness  and  stupidity  and  hardness 
of  heart.  But  as  the  case  now  is,  little  and  in  most  cases  nothing 
of  this  care  and  diligence  of  parents  being  exercised  towards  their 
children,  they  are  left  without  any  better  principles  and  motives 
of  action  than  their  own  corrupt  unrestrained  biases ;  and  thus 
following  these,  they  slide  with  an  easy  descent  down  the  broad 
way  to  destruction. 

2.  Another  way  whereby  more  especially  many  bring  upon 
themselves  eternal  ruin,  is  their  presuming  upon  the  mercy  of  God. 
They  have  heard  much  of  the  infinite  mercy  of  God,  and  they  ex- 
pect that  he  will  be  merciful  to  them.  Why  ?  Because  they  have 
complied  with  the  terms  of  the  covenant  of  grace  ?  No  ;  but 
because  they  think  damnation  is  so  dreadful  a  thing  that  they 
hope  and  expect  that  God  will  not  be  so  severe  as  to  inflict  it 
upon  them.  Thus  they  settle  down  in  sinful  security  which  fi- 
nally brings  on  their  eternal  ruin.  But  let  such  men  know  that 
although  it  be  a  dreadful  thing  that  any  one  should  be  eternally 
damned,  yet   it   is   much  more  dreadful  that  the  honor  and  dig- 


THE  BROxVD  WAY.  419 

nity  of  God's  government  should  not  be  maintained  ;  and  rather 
than  it  sliould  not  be  maintained,  not  one,  or  some  few  only  of 
the  human  race,  but  thousands  and  thousands  of  them  shall  be 
sent  down  to  everlasting  destruction. 

3.  Another  vvay,  whereby  many  contribute  much  to  their  own 
ruin  and  destruction  is  this,  that  they  quiet  their  own  consciences 
by  their  intentions  of  future  repentance  and  reformation.  These 
men  by  hearing  of  the  terrors  of  the  law,  and  by  reflecting  upon 
their  own  conduct  and  exercises  of  heart,  perceive  that  they  are 
guilty,  and  their  consciences  are  disquieted  and  inwardly  troubled. 
But  this  uneasiness  they  endeavor  to  remove  by  flattering  them- 
selves with  their  own  good  intentions  and  future  purposes.  They 
see  that  at  present  they  are  in  a  wretched  and  miserable  situa- 
tion. They  see  that  they  are  now  in  the  broad  way  which  lead- 
eth  to  destruction  ;  and  will  not  deny,  that  continuing  in  their 
present  course  they  shall  infallibly  go  down  to  eternal  death. 
And  knowing  all  this,  they  would  not  for  worlds,  die  in  their 
present  state.  But  they  intend  not  always  to  continue  in  this 
state.  For  the  present  indeed  they  find  it  most  agreeable. 
They  have  this  or  that  gay  scene  to  enjoy  ;  this  or  that  im- 
portant transaction  to  finish  ;  and  then  they  intend  to  begin  a 
reformation.  Then  they  intend  to  forsake  the  broad  way  in 
which  they  have  hitherto  walked,  and  to  enter  in  good  earnest 
upon  the  narrow  way  which  leadeth  unto  life.  This  is  eminent- 
ly the  case  with  persons  in  youth.  They  think  there  is  time 
enough  yet  for  them  to  become  religious ;  they  are  but  young, 
and  they  know  many  persons  who  have  lived  in  the  free  enjoy- 
ment of  youthful  gaities  much  longer  than  they  have,  who  yet  af- 
terwards reformed  and  became  very  good  men.  And  they  see 
no  reason  why  they  may  not  also  do  the  same.  And  this  is  what 
they  intend,  or  at  least  think  they  intend  hereafter.  After  they 
shall  have  arrived  at  such  an  age,  they  think  they  shall  be  just  fit 
for  the  gloomy  business  of  religion,  and  that  then  it  will  be  an 
easy  employment.  They  seem  to  think  that  religion  is  as  it  were, 
the  natural  product  of  old  age ;  and  that  therefore  it  will  then  be 
an  easy  thing  for  them  to  become  christians.  By  these  and  such 
like  faint  intentions,  they  quiet  the  uneasiness  of  conscience  ; 
and  instead  of  indeed  forsaking  their  present  evil  course  and  en- 
tering upon  the  paths  of  true  wisdom,  they  quietly  settle  down 
in  their  present  state  and  undisturbedly  walk  on  in  the  broad 
way  which  leadeth  to  destruction. 

4.  Another  way  whereby  many  aid  on  their  own  ruin,  is  this, 
that  by  false  glosses,  reasonings  and  conclusions  they  endeavor 
to  make  those  things  appear  innocent  which  they  are  conscious 


420  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

to  themselves  are  wrong  and  wicked.  This  very  many  are  guil- 
ty of  doing.  They  first  commit  wickedness,  and  then  they  cast 
about  on  all  sides  to  find  arguments  to  justify  it.  What  they 
have  done  they  wish  were  innocent,  and  they  endeavor  to  prove 
it  to  be  so.  Or  if  they  have  not  yet  committed  the  evil,  yet  be- 
ing desirous  of  committing  it,  they  are  desirous  of  being  able 
to  justify  it,  that  then  they  may  commit  it  with  a  quiet  con- 
science. While  it  is  the  wish  of  their  hearts  that  such  an  action 
were  innocent,  they  will  in  most  cases  flatter  themselves  into  the 
belief  that  it  really  is  so.  For  in  this  case,  they  are  altogether 
under  the  power  of  prejudice,  even  that  prejudice  by  which  man 
in  most  cases  is  entirely  blinded.  They  are  both  prejudiced  in 
favor  of  the  innocency  of  the  action  and  against  the  contrary. 
This  being  the  case,  whatever  arguments  and  reasons  there  are  to 
be  urged  in  favor  of  its  innocency  are  attended  to  with  eagerness, 
and  admitted  in  their  full  weight  and  strength  ;  while  those  things 
which  tend  to  make  it  appear  that  the  action  is  evil  and  wicked, 
are  carelessly  overlooked  or  cautiously  kept  out  of  view.  Thus 
by  these  means  many  more  persuade  themselves  of  the  innocency 
of  actions  and  conduct  in  which  there  is  the  most  heinous  guilt. 
And  being  persuaded  of  this,  they  have  nothing  now  to  prevent 
their  proceeding  with  ease  in  the  plain,  descending  and  broad 
way  of  death.  And  by  these  means  multitudes  seem  to  take 
pains  to  bring  upon  themselves  eternal  destruction. 

5.  Another  reason  of  the  destruction  of  such  a  vast  multitude 
of  mankind  is,  that  many  who  are  in  the  broad  way  yet  flatter 
themselves  concerning  their  safe  estate.  They  say  to  them- 
selves, "  peace,  peace,  when  there  is  no  peace  "  to  the  wicked. 
There  is  in  mankind  a  certain  unaccountable  backwardness  to  be- 
lieve that  they  are  in  a  really  dangerous  estate.  Although  they 
are  frequently  informed  of  this,  yea,  though  God  himself  has 
solemnly  and  repeatedly  declared  it  to  them,  yet  with  regard  to 
themselves  they  cannot  believe  it.  They  hear  indeed  much  said 
about  the  total  corruption  of  human  nature,  and  of  the  absolute 
necessity  of  the  new  birth,  and  that  old  things  must  pass  away 
and  all  become  new.  But  although  they  have  never  found 
any  such  extraordinary  change  in  themselves,  nor  those  fruits  and 
marks  of  it  which  the  scriptures  lay  down,  yet  they  will  flatter 
themselves  that  they  are  in  a  condition  at  least  tolerably  good. 
They  find  many  good  things  in  themselves  all  which  they  cannot 
believe  God  will  disregard.  They  have  never  been  guilty  of  any 
enormous  acts  of  wickedness,  such  as  lying,  drunkenness,  theft 
or  murder.  And  therefore  concluding  that  they  are  much  better 
than  those  who  have  been  guilty  of  those  things,  they  at  the  same 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  421 

time  imagine  themselves  to  be  in  general  tolerably  good  ;  inso- 
much that  they  cannot  think  tliey  are  now  going  on  in  the  broad 
way  to  destruction,  but  think  they  have  at  least  begun  to  walk  in 
the  narrow  way  which  leadeth  unto  life.  Thus  while  they  so  de- 
ceive themselves  is  it  not  to  be  wondered  that  they  forsake  not 
their  present  course  for  another,  and  that  they  persist  in  the  broad 
way  going  down  to  destruction  with  a  lie  in  their  right  hand  ? 

6.  Another  thing  which  also  occasions  the  destruction  of  many 
is,  the  offences  and  stumbling  blocks  thi'own  in  their  way  by 
those  who  profess  to  be  true  christians.  Those  who  are  with- 
out are  always  watching  the  conduct  of  professors  of  religion  ;  and 
not  without  reason.  For  the  profession  which  they  make  is  a 
very  extraordinary  one  ;  and  well  may  they  expect  that  the  atten- 
tion of  others,  especially  of  those  who  would  justify  themselves 
in  sin,  will  be  excited  to  observe  whether  or  no  they  act  up  to  that 
profession.  Professors  are  a  city  set  upon  a  hill,  which  cannot 
be  hid  from  the  view  and  observation  of  mankind.  They  are  a 
candle  not  put  under  a  bushel,  or  under  a  bed,  but  on  a  candle- 
stick tiiat  they  which  enter  in  may  see  the  light.  When  there- 
fore these  professors  conduct  unworthily  of  their  profession  and 
live  not  up  to  the  rules  of  the  gospel,  others  who  are  without  will 
take  occasion  from  it  to  justify  themselves  in  their  sin  and  to  hard- 
en themselves  in  their  iniquity  ;  and  to  conclude  either  that  all 
religion  is  vain,  or  else  that  they  have  as  much  of  it  as  any  others 
whatever.  And  such  occasions  as  these,  they  who  are  without 
are  for  the  most  part  glad  to  seize  and  use  for  their  own  jus- 
tification. O  !  how  careful  then  ought  professors  to  be,  to  cause 
their  light  so  to  shine  before  men,  that  they  may  see  their  good 
works,  and  thus  be  led  to  glorify  their  Father  who  is  in  heaven  ! 
How  careful  should  they  be  so  to  live  as  to  cut  off  all  occasion 
from  those  who  seek  occasion  to  dishonor  God  and  ruin  their  own 
souls. 

7.  I  observe  once  more  that  another  occasion  of  the  destruc- 
tion of  such  multitudes  is,  that  men  do  as  it  were  draw  another 
along  down  the  broad  way  to  death.  This  appears  in  a  variety 
of  instances.  Thus  among  those  in  youth,  how  much  corruption 
and  wickedness  will  one  evil  companion  spread.  Many  persons 
in  youth  are  led  into  tiiose  abominations  by  others,  of  wiiich  per- 
haps they  themselves  would  never  have  thought,  and  which  when 
they  once  have  come  to  practise  they  never  again  forsake,  but  are 
finally  ruined.  In  like  manner  also  the  heads  of  families,  by  set- 
ting a  bad  example,  frequently  become  the  occasion  of  leading 
their  whole  families  into  such  iniquities  as  prove  their  eternal  ru- 
in.    So  also  it  is  with  men  in  elevated  and  honorable  stations  in 

36* 


422  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

life,  or  men  of  superior  understanding,  property  and  influence.  If 
they  themselves  be  corrupt  and  set  an  evil  example,  they  frequent- 
ly spread  corruption  and  wickedness  far  and  near,  and  occasion 
the  ruin  of  the  greater  part  of  whole  societies  and  bodies  of  men. 
Thus  "  one  sinner  destroyeth  much  good  ;"  and  thus  notwith- 
standing the  way  is  so  broad  and  plain  and  of  such  easy  descent, 
yet  do  men,  as  it  were,  crowd  and  drag  one  another  along  down  to 
its  end  of  ruin.  Having  thus  in  some  manner  spoken  upon  the 
first  four  topics  proposed,  we  come  now  by  way  of  improvement, 

V.  To  press  the  counsel  given  by  Jesus  Christ  in  our  text 
to  enter  in  at  the  strait  gate. 

If  the  gate  is  so  strait  and  the  way  so  narrow  which  leads 
to  life  that  but  few  ever  find  it,  and  if  the  gate  is  so  wide  and 
the  way  so  broad  that  leadeth  to  destruction  that  many  there  be 
which  go  in  thereat ;  this  shows  the  great  danger  we  are  in  lest 
we  be  swallowed  up  with  the  multitude  which  go  down  to  de- 
struction, and  also  the  great  care  and  diligence  which  are  needful 
in  order  to  avoid  the  wide  gate  and  to  escape  from  the  broad  way, 
and  to  walk  in  the  narrow  way  so  as  to  obtain  eternal  life.  The 
great  and  deep  earnestness  and  pains  to  be  used  in  this  affair 
are  expressed  by  striving.  "  Strive  to  enter  in  at  the  strait 
gate  ;"  or  as  the  word  properly  signifies,  "  agonize"  or  strive  with 
all  the  eagerness  and  distress  of  an  agony.  This  is  the  counsel 
and  advice  which  Christ  himself  gives  ;  and  will  you  not  hearken 
and  comply  with  it?  That  you  may  indeed  be  prevailed  upon 
to  do  this,  I  beg  you  to  consider  these  several  things,  which  I  shall 
mention  : 

1.  This  counsel  and  advice  of  Christ  is  the  most  important 
counsel  that  ever  was  given  you.  You  may  have  had  counsel 
given  which  is  very  important  respecting  your  temporal  interest, 
counsel  directing  you  how  to  avoid  the  loss  and  ruin  of  your  es- 
tate, of  your  honor  and  reputation,  or  your  liberty  ;  or  what  is 
commonly  esteemed  more  than  all  these,  you  may  have  been  coun- 
selled how  to  avoid  the  loss  of  your  life.  But  what  is  the  coun- 
sel given  in  any  or  all  of  these  instances  compared  with  that  giv- 
en in  our  text?  What  if  you  should  lose  all  your  worldly  pos- 
sessions, and  from  flourishing  circumstances  should  be  reduced  to 
want  and  beggary  ?  What  if  you  should  lose  all  honor  and  re- 
putation among  men,  and  they  should  hate  you  and  separate  you 
from  their  company,  and  reproach  you,  and  cast  out  your  name 
as  evil  ?  What  if  you  should  lose  your  liberty,  and  be  reduced 
to  a  state  of  the  most  abject  slavery,  or  should  even  lose  your  lives 
also?  What  would  the  loss  and  ruin  even  of  all  these  things  be, 
when  compared  with  that  terrible  destruction  mentioned  in  our 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  423 

text  ?  But  further,  you  may  have  had  counsel  given  you,  not  on- 
ly directing  you  how  to  prevent  the  losses,  but  how  to  make  great 
acquirements  in  the  the  things  mentioned  ;  how  to  make  great 
acquirements  for  instance  in  worldly  possessions,  or  in  honor  and 
promotion  among  men  ;  and  this  counsel  may  have  been  of  great 
importance  to  you.  But  of  what  importance  is  it  when  compar- 
ed with  that  counsel  given  in  the  text  ?  What  are  all  the  losses 
and  gains  which  can  happen  in  these  things  compared  with  the 
infinite  loss  to  be  sustained  on  the  one  hand,  or  the  infinite  gain  to 
be  acquired  on  the  other,  according  as  you  go  on  in  the  broad 
way  that  Icadeth  to  destruction,  or  in  the  narrow  way  which  lead- 
eth  unto  life  ?  When  laid  in  the  balance  together,  they  are  but 
as  an  atom  to  mountains  ;  the  former  are  less  than  nothing  and 
vanity.  "  For  what  is  a  man  profited  if  he  shall  gain  the  whole 
world  and  lose  his  own  soul,  or  what  shall  a  man  give  in  ex- 
change for  his  soul  ?  Yet  the  counsel  which  you  have  received 
as  to  the  one  class  of  tilings,  you  have  doubtless,  in  many  instan- 
ces complied  with.  How  much  more  then  ought  you  to  comply 
with  this  counsel  given  by  our  Lord  in  the  text  ? 

2.  Not  only  is  this  advice  and  counsel  of  our  Lord  important, 
but  is  given  to  you  by  one  who  is  your  very  great  friend. 
Tiiere  can  be  no  one  so  truly  your  friend  as  one  who  is  willing  to 
die  in  your  stead.  Nor  is  there  any  love  equal  to  dying  love. 
The  person  who  undertakes  to  die  in  another's  stead  and  does 
actually  die,  gives  the  highest  possible  evidence  of  his  love  and 
friendship.  But  this  evidence  has  Christ  given  of  his  love  and 
regard  to  mankind.  He  gave  up  himself  to  suflfer  death  in  their 
stead,  witiiout  any  motive  to  excite  him  thereto  but  pure  love 
and  good  will.  What  other  motive  could  there  be  to  influence 
him  ?  Could  he  gain  anything  by  it?  Could  it  be  of  any  profit 
or  advantage  to  him  ?  No ;  not  in  the  least ;  and  yet  he  freely 
gave  himself  up  to  be  offered  a  sacrifice  for  us.  Our  Lord  Je- 
sus Christ,  even  to  this  day,  retains  a  standing  monument  of  his 
love  to  sinners,  in  that  he  still  retains  his  human  nature,  although 
exalted  to  a  glorified  state  in  heaven.  He  also  gives  abundant 
evidence  of  the  same  love,  by  his  frequent  and  most  gracious  in- 
vitations to  sinners  in  general  to  come  to  him  and  accept  of  life, 
as  well  as  by  the  application  of  the  benefits  of  redemption  to  par- 
ticular persons.  If  therefore  you  have  been  ready  to  hearken  to 
your  friends  in  the  counsel  which  they  have  given  you,  how  much 
more  ought  you  to  hearken  to  the  counsel  of  our  text  given  you 
by  the  greatest  and  best  friend  to  sinners  that  ever  was,  or  ever 
will  be  on  earth.     Again, 

3.  Let  us  consider  also  the  friendly  manner  in  which  this 


424  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

counsel  is  proposed,  and  that  it  is  in  order  to  prevent  and  dis' 
suade  us  from  our  own  ruin.  Christ  sees  us  in  the  way  which 
leadeth  to  destruction,  but  he  feels  for  our  danger  and  is  unwilling 
we  should  proceed  therein.  He  therefore  in  a  most  friendly  man- 
ner counsels  us  to  forsake  our  present  course,  and  to  enter  in  at 
the  strait  gate  which  leadeth  unto  life.  The  Lord  God  also 
expresses  himself  after  the  same  manner.  Ez.  18:  31,  "Cast 
away  from  you  all  your  transgressions  whereby  you  have  trans- 
gressed and  make  you  a  new  heart,  and  a  new  spirit ;  for  why 
will  ye  die,  O  house  of  Israel  ?  For  I  have  no  pleasure  in  the 
death  of  him  that  dieth,  saith  the  Lord  God :  wherefore  turn 
yourself  and  live  ye."  And  not  only  here  but  in  innumerable 
other  places  God  proposes  this  counsel  in  the  same  friendly 
manner. 

4.  This  great  friend  of  yours  does  not  give  this  counsel  upon 
any  slight  apprehensions  of  the  desti'uction  to  which  you  are 
exposed  but  with  a  perfect  knowledge  of  it.  You  on  your  part 
have  heard  of  this  destruction,  but  he  sees  it.  Job  26:  6,  "  Hell 
is  naked  before  him,  and  destruction  hath  no  covering."  He  sees 
what  misery  the  wicked  suffer  in  the  other  world  ;  he  knows  per- 
fectly all  their  pains  and  tortures.  He  clearly  sees  the  fearfulness 
which  surprises  the  multitudes  who  walk  in  the  broad  way,  as 
they  pass  by  the  gate  of  death  to  the  invisible  world.  Yea,  fur- 
ther, he  has  given  abundant  evidence  of  his  great  sense  of  the 
dreadfulness  of  this  destruction.  Now  if  Jesus  Christ  had  not 
known,  and  had  not  also  a  very  great  sense  of  its  dreadfulness 
would  he  have  ever  laid  down  his  life  to  save  men  from 
it  ?  Would  he  have  ever  deemed  all  this  expense  needful  to 
save  men  from  any  trifling,  inconsiderable  evil  ?  Had  Christ 
come  to  us  and  told  us  that  this  destruction  was  dreadful,  even 
his  word  would  have  been  great  evidence  of  it.  Or  if  he  had 
come  into  the  world  and  not  only  told  us  this,  but  had  labored 
and  toiled  much  in  order  to  deliver  us  from  it,  this  would  have 
been  still  greater  evidence.  But  how  much  greater  is  the  evi- 
dence when  he  comes,  and  not  only  toils  and  labors  much,  but 
humbles  himself  to  death,  even  the  death  of  the  cross  ?  Heark- 
en, therefore,  to  tlie  counsel  of  him  who  perfectly  knows  and 
has  given  such  abundant  evidence  of  his  great  sense  of  the  dread- 
fulness of  that  destruction  to  which  you  are  exposed. 

5.  Again  ;  besides  the  warnings  and  counsels  given  by  Christ 
in  his  word,  you  have  many  other  warnings  also  to  enter  in  at 
the  strait  gate.  Death  has  come  and  suddenly  carried  away 
many  who  were  stupidly  going  on  in  the  broad  way.  Many  no 
doubt  of  your  acquaintance  have  been  walking  in  that  way,  who 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  425 

never  intended  to  be  overtaken  therein  by  the  king  of  terrors,  and 
yet  have  been  suddenly  snatched  away  with  httle  or  no  time  to 
prepare.  These  things  have  been  loud  calls  of  providence  to  you, 
inculcating  the  same  counsel  as  this  in  our  text.  Again  ;  many 
of  those  who  have  walked  all  their  life  long  in  the  broad  way, 
when  they  have  come  to  die  being  sensible  of  their  awful  condi- 
tion and  that  they  were  sinking  to  hell,  have  left  their  most  ear- 
nest and  solemn  warnings  to  you  not  to  live  as  they  have  lived. 
O  !  how  have  tiiey  wished  for  but  one  year,  one  month,  one  week 
longer  to  live,  that  they  might  spend  it  in  a  very  different  man- 
ner from  that  in  wiiich  they  have  spent  their  past  lives  !  And 
they  have  in  the  most  earnest  and  affecting  manner  called  upon 
those  around  them  to  beware  of  treading  in  their  steps.  You 
have  also  been  warned  by  those  who  have  truly  repented  of  their 
sins,  and  have  forsaken  the  broad  way  that  leadeth  to  destruction. 
They  have  told  you  the  danger  that  you  are  in,  and  have  ex- 
horted you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come.  And  what  do  you 
think  will  be  the  consequence,  if  after  all  these  warnings  you  per- 
sist in  the  broad  way?  Hear  the  words  of  Solomon,  "  He  that 
being  often  reproved  hardeneth  his  neck,  shall  suddenly  be  de- 
stroyed and  that  without  remedy." 

6.  And  the  suddenness  of  this  destruction  should  be  an  ad- 
ditional motive  to  comply  with  the  counsel  of  our  text.  It  is 
commonly  represented  in  scripture  as  coming  on  men  very  sud- 
denly and  unexpectedly.  Thus  it  is  compared  to  a  cry  at  mid- 
night, which  happens  when  all  are  buried  in  sleep,  and  have  no 
expectation  of  any  such  thing.  It  is  compared  also  to  a  thief  in 
the  night,  who  always  comes  in  the  most  secret  manner  and  at  a 
time  when  he  is  least  expected.  Matt.  24:  42,  43,  "  Watch 
therefore,  for  ye  know  not  what  hour  your  Lord  doth  come.  But 
know  this,  that  if  the  good  man  of  the  house  had  known  in  what 
watch  the  thief  would  come,  he  would  have  watched,  and  would 
not  have  suffered  his  house  to  be  broken  up.  Therefore  be  ye 
also  ready,  for  in  such  an  hour  as  ye  think  not,  the  Son  of  man 
Cometh."  And  this  the  apostle  speaks  of  as  evidently  and  per- 
fectly well  known  to  the  church  in  his  days.  1  Thess.  5:  23, 
"  For  ye  yourselves  know  perfectly,  that  the  day  of  the  Lord  so 
cometh  as  a  thief  in  the  night.  For  when  they  shall  say  peace 
and  safety,  then  sudden  destruction  cometh  upon  them,  as  tra- 
vail upon  a  woman  with  child,  and  they  shall  not  escape."  So 
also  Job  27:  20,  21,  "  Terrors  take  hold  on  him  as  waters,  a  tem- 
pest stealeth  him  away  in  the  night.  The  east  wind  carrieth  him 
away  and  he  departeth  ;  and  as  a  storm  hurleth  him  out  of  his 
place,"     The  coming  of  Christ  is  also  compared   to  a  snare. 


426  THE  BROAD  WAY. 

Luke  21:  35,  "  For  as  a  snare  shall  it  come  on  all  them  that 
dwell  on  the  face  ot  the  whole  earth."  Eccl.  9:  12,  "  For  man  also 
knoweth  not  his  time  as  the  fishes  that  are  taken  in  an  evil  net,  and 
the  birds  that  are  caught  in  a  snare  ;  so  are  the  sons  of  men  snared 
in  an  evil  time  when  it  falleth  suddenly  upon  them."  Thus  it 
was  with  the  old  world  ;  they  were  going  heedlessly  along  the 
broad  way,  till  sudden  and  unexpected  destruction  came  upon 
them  ;  and  so  also  was  it  in  the  days  of  Lot.  Luke  17:  26,  etc. 
"  And  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Noe,  so  shall  it  be  also  in  the  days 
of  the  Son  of  man.  They  did  eat,  they  drank,  they  married, 
they  were  given  in  marriage,  until  the  day  that  Noe  entered  into 
the  ark,  and  the  flood  came  and  destroyed  them  all.  Likewise 
also  as  it  was  in  the  days  of  Lot  ;  they  did  eat,  they  drank,  they 
bought,  they  sold,  they  planted,  they  builded  ;  but  the  same  day 
that  Lot  went  out  of  Sodom,  it  rained  fire  and  brimstone  from 
heaven  and  destroyed  them  all.  Even  thus  shall  it  be  in  the  day 
when  the  Son  of  man  is  revealed."  The  dissolution  of  the  world 
is  also  compared  to  the  sliding  of  the  feet.  Deut.  32:  35,  "  To 
me  belongeth  vengeance  and  recompense  ;  their  feet  shall  slide 
in  due  time."  And  the  Psalmist  says,  "  Surely  thou  didst  set 
them  in  slippery  places."  Upon  the  whole  then  unless  you  com- 
ply with  the  counsel  given  in  the  text,  you  are  daily  exposed  to 
the  sudden  destruction  of  the  rich  man.  While  he  was  medita- 
ting how  he  should  lay  up  for  his  soul  much  goods  for  many 
years,  that  he  might  eat  and  drink  and  be  merry,  God  said  to 
him,  "  Thou  fool,  this  night  shall  thy  soul  be  required  of  thee." 
Finally  ; 

7.  If  you  do  not  comply  with  this  counsel,  what  will  you 
think  of  your  own  conduct  hereafter  ?  Your  time  in  this  world 
is  but  very  short  at  the  longest,  and  how  much  it  may  be  short- 
ened you  know  not.  When  therefore  it  shall  be  forever  past, 
and  you  shall  come  to  reflect  upon  your  conduct  in  another  world, 
what  will  be  your  sentiments  ?  Without  doubt  you  will  mourn 
at  the  last,  when  your  flesh  and  your  body  are  consumed,  you 
will  say,  *'  How  have  I  hated  instruction  and  reproof  and  have 
not  obeyed  the  voice  of  my  teachers,  nor  inclined  mine  ear  to 
them  that  instructed  me  ?"  You  will  then  curse  yourselves 
for  your  folly  and  stupidity.  You  will  curse  yourselves  that  you 
were  such  fools  that  when  such  a  price  was  put  into  your  hands 
to  get  wisdom,  you  had  no  heart  to  improve  it.  Then,  every  kind 
invitation  of  the  gospel,  every  kind  and  friendly  warning  of  Christ, 
the  consideration  of  his  painful  life,  and  of  his  shameful  and  ac- 
cursed death,  as  well  as  every  wholesome  warning  of  providence, 
of  your  friends,  of  God's  ministers,  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  will 


THE  BROAD  WAY.  427 

be  as  a  fiery  sting  and  as  the  worm  that  never  dies  to  your  souls ! 
Then  wlicn  the  wrath  of  God  shall  actually  have  taken  hold  upon 
you,  it  will  be  too  late  for  repentance.  Then  will  you  be  in  the 
wretched  condition  of  Esau  "  who  for  one  morsel  of  meat  sold 
his  birth-right ;  and  who  afterwards  when  he  would  have  inheri- 
ted the  blessing  was  rejected  ;  for  he  found  no  place  of  repen- 
tance, though  he  sought  it  carefully  with  tears."  You  will  have 
sold  your  birth-right  for  eternity,  and  you  cannot  regain  it,  though 
you  weep  and  mourn  forever  ! 


SERMON   XXYIII. 


UNIVERSAL  SALVATION   INCONSISTENT    WITH   SALVATION 

BY  CHRIST.* 

1  Timothy  1 :  15. — This  is  a  faithful  saying,  and  ivorlhy  of  all  acceptation, 
that  Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  icorld  to  save  sinners. 

If  this  be  a  faithful  saying,  it  is  worthy  of  our  faith  or  belief, 
and  if  worthy  of  our  belief,  it  is  true.  But  if  it  be  true  that  Christ 
Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners,  there  was  doubtless  a 
wisdom,  a  propriety,  yea,  a  necessity  for  it ;  for  it  is  altogether 
incredible  that  he  should  descend  from  heaven,  abdicate  for  a 
season  its  glory  and  blessedness,  become  incarnate  and  die  on  the 
cross  to  save  sinners,  unless  all  this  was  wise,  proper  and  neces- 
sary. But  I  conceive  that  the  doctrine  of  the  salvation  of  all  men 
is  incapable  of  being  reconciled  with  this  plain,  acknowledged 
and  fundamental  fact  testified  in  our  text ;  and  I  propose  in  the 
present  discourse  to  compare  that  doctrine  with  this  fact,  and  in- 
quire whether  they  can  be  reconciled.  If  all  men  are  to  be  fi- 
nally saved,  it  will  be  either  through  Christ,  or  not  through  him. 
Let  either  supposition  be  adopted ;  it  is  proposed  to  consider 
them  both. 

I.  All  men  will  be  saved  through  Christ. 

If  so,  all  will  be  saved  by  him  either  from  an  endless,  or  from  a 
temporary  punishment.  In  this  again  let  either  supposition  be 
adopted. 

1.  We  will  suppose  that  Christ  came  to  save  all  men  from  an 
endless  punishment.  If  this  supposition  be  true,  several  import- 
ant consequences  will  follow. 

(1)  That  an  endless  punishment  is  the  curse  of  the  divine 
law  ;  the  very  curse  which  the  law  denounces  against  every  sin- 
ner. We  read.  Gal.  3:  13,  "  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  being  made  a  curse  for  us."  It  is  a  question 
of  primary  importance  in  all  discussions  concerning  the  future 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  "  What  is  the  curse  or  threatening  of 
the  divine  law  ?"  This  text  in  Galatians  determines  peremptori- 
ly that  it  is  the  curse  from  which  Christ  hath  redeemed  us ;  and 

*  First  preached  in  1784. 


SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  429 

if  Christ  hath  redeemed  us,  as  is  now  supposed,  from  an  endless 
punishment,  then  an  endless  punishment  is  the  curse  threatened 
in  the  law.     So  far  seems  to  be  plain. 

(2)  It  will  also  follow  from  the  supposition  that  Christ  came 
to  save  us  from  an  endless  punishment,  that  an  endless  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner  is  deserved,  and  may  be  inflicted  consistently 
with  perfect  justice.  If  God  himself  be  a  just  God,  his  law  is 
just.  If  his  law  be  just,  the  curse  denounced  in  it  is  just.  But  this 
curse  is  that  very  one,  whatever  it  be,  from  which  Christ  came  to 
save  us,  and  by  the  present  supposition  is  conceded  to  be  an 
endless  punishment. 

Besides,  the  justice  of  inflicting  endless  punishment  on  the  sin- 
ner, appears  immediately  from  what  is  granted  in  the  supposition 
now  before  us.  It  is  supposed  that  Christ  came  to  save  us  all 
from  an  endless  punishment ;  therefore  we  were  justly  exposed 
to  an  endless  punishment.  Otherwise  there  was  no  need  at  all 
that  Christ  should  be  sent  to  redeem  and  save  us  from  such  a 
punishment.  God  would  have  been  obliged,  on  the  footing  of 
law  and  justice,  to  preserve  us  from  it.  He  was  originally  bound 
by  justice  never  to  threaten  it,  and  if  he  had  threatened  it,  imme- 
diately to  abolish  the  threatening.  The  very  enacting  of  a  law 
with  this  threatening  annexed  to  it,  unless  it  was  perfectly  just, 
was  an  act  of  oppression  and  tyranny  ;  and  for  the  Deity  to  per- 
form such  an  act,  would  be  to  deny  himself  and  to  divest  himself 
of  all  moral  perfection  or  rectitude.  Nor  can  we  any  more  re- 
concile with  God's  rectitude,  the  sending  of  Christ  his  Son  to 
redeem  or  save  us  from  an  unjust  punishment.  To  insist  on  an 
atonement,  or  ransom,  or  redemption,  in  order  to  preserve  us 
from  an  endless  punishment  when  it  was  not  justly  due  to  us,  is 
equally,  if  not  more  unjust  and  tyrannical  than  the  threatening 
of  such  a  punishment.  Nor  is  it  any  more  credible,  or  consistent 
with  the  moral  perfection  of  Jesus  Christ  that  he  should  redeem 
us  from  an  unjust  punishment.  This  would  have  been  to  justify 
iniquity,  and  to  join  with  God  the  Father  in  a  system  of  tyranny 
and  oppression,  and  consequently  would  bring  the  guilt  of  such  a 
system  on  himself.  It  would  have  been  no  more  than  right  in 
this  case,  that  Christ  should  indeed  have  taken  a  part  friendly  to 
sinning  men,  not  by  redeeming  them  from  a  punishment  to  which 
they  were  not  justly  exposed,  but  by  pleading  the  cause  of  jus- 
tice, and  insisting  that  they  should  be  liberated  without  any  re- 
demption at  all. 

Thus  if  we  allow  that  Christ  came  to  save  all  men  from  an  end- 
less punishment,  we  must  not  only  give  up  the  moral  rectitude  of 
God  and  of  his  son  Jesus  Christ,  but  must  impute  to  them  the 

Vol.  II.  37 


430  UNIVERSAL   SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

grossest  oppression  and  iniquity.  Nor  is  there  any  way  to  avoid 
these  shocking  consequences,  but  by  granting  that  an  endless  pun- 
ishment is  justly  threatened  against  all  mankind,  and  may  justly 
be  inflicted. 

(3)  It  follows  from  the  supposition  that  Christ  came  to  save 
all  men  from  an  endless  punishment,  that  all  the  arguments 
against  such  a  punishment  drawn  from  its  dreadfulness,  or  from 
the  divine  perfections  of  goodness,  benevolence,  justice  and  im- 
partiality, must  be  entirely  relinquished  as  being  nothing  to  the 
purpose.  Yet  these  are  some  of  the  chief  arguments  in  favor  of 
the  salvation  of  all  men,  the  most  popular,  and  urged  with  the 
greatest  success.  Thus  a  great  champion  for  the  salvation  of  all 
men,  says,  "  It  is  not  honorable  to  the  infinitely  righteous  and  be- 
nevolent God  of  the  world,  to  make  men  everlastingly  miserable, 
because  sin  is  a  finite  evil ;"  and  again,  "  That  the  doctrine  of 
endless  punishment  looks  like  a  reflection  on  the  infinite  justice, 
as  well  as  goodness  of  God  ;"  and  again,  "  To  reconcile  this  doc- 
trine with  the  strict  impartiality  of  God  is  beyond  me."  He  also 
quotes  from  Mr.  Whiston  these  words  :  "  If  the  doctrine  of  end- 
less punishment  be  true,  the  justice  of  God  must  be  inevitably 
given  up,  and  much  more  his  goodness  ;"  again,  "  That  it  sup- 
poses God  to  delight  in  cruelty."  Now  how  can  these  things  be 
reconciled  with  the  mediation,  death,  or  intercession  of  Christ,  in 
order  to  save  all  men  ?  Did  God  threaten  a  punishment  which 
is  not  just ;  one  which  is  not  honorable  to  his  righteousness  and 
benevolence ;  such  a  one  as  gives  occasion  for  reflections  on  his 
infinite  justice  ;  such  a  one  as  cannot  be  reconciled  with  strict 
impartiality  ;  a  punishment  which  being  supposed  to  be  inflicted, 
both  the  justice  and  goodness  of  God  must  be  given  up  ;  such  a 
punishment  as  supposes  that  he  delights  in  cruelty  ?  And  hav- 
ing threatened  this  punishment  did  he  hold  to  it,  and  refuse  to 
release  the  sinner  from  it,  but  in  consequence  of  the  redemption 
of  Christ  ?  Or  did  Christ  join  in  such  an  unjust  procedure,  and 
himself  become  incarnate,  and  suffer  and  die  in  order  to  deliver 
us  from  such  a  punishment  ?  No,  these  things  are  absolutely  in- 
credible. 

Yet  Christ  has  come  to  redeem  and  save  us.  This  is  not  dis- 
puted. And  according  to  the  supposition  now  before  us,  he  came 
to  redeem  us  from  an  endless  punishment.  What  is  the  conse- 
quence ?  Why  most  undoubtedly  this,  that  the  endless  punish- 
ment of  the  sinner  is  just,  and  consistent  with  all  the  divine  per- 
fections ;  and  therefore,  that  all  those  arguments  in  favor  of  the 
salvation  of  all  men  which  are  drawn  from  the  divine  goodness 
and  justice  must  be  entirely  relinquished.     Nor  can  it  be  ever 


WITH   SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  431 

again  pleaded,  that  the  doctrine  of  an  endless  punishment  is  un- 
just, or  tiiat  it  is  severe  and  unaccountable  that  the  greater  i)art 
of  mankind,  (the  heathen  for  example,  and  those  who  have  had 
little  or  no  advantages  for  knowing  God  and  Jesus  Christ)  should 
be  doomed  to  an  endless  punishment.  To  own  that  Christ  came 
to  save  all  men  from  an  endless  punishment,  and  yet  to  plead 
these  and  such  like  arguments  in  favor  of  the  salvation  of  all,  is 
to  be  entirely  inconsistent  with  ourselves. 

(4)  It  follows,  from  the  supposition  that  all  are  saved  through 
Christ  from  an  endless  punishment,  that  every  man  who  is  saved, 
is  saved  by  free  and  sovereign  grace  and  mercy.  The  reason  is 
plain,  that  all  justly  deserve,  and  are  justly  exposed  to  an  endless 
j)unishmcnt,  and  therefore  no  man  can  plead  justice  in  order  to 
liis  salvation  ;  and  whosoever  is  saved,  is  saved  not  on  the  foot- 
ing of  justice  and  personal  right,  for  if  this  could  be,  Christ  would 
never  have  died,  but  is  saved  on  the  sole  footing  of  free  and  sove- 
reign grace. 

Here  I  cannot  but  notice  an  inconsistency  in  the  author  of 
the  late  noted  plea  for  the  salvation  of  all  men.  He  asserts  that 
those  who  die  in  impenitence  suffer  in  degree  and  duration,  in 
proportion  to  the  depravilij  which  they  contract  in  this  life  ;  that 
tliey  will  be  miserable  in  degree  and  duration,  in  proportion  to 
the  number  and  greatness  of  their  sins  ;  that  there  will  be  a  dif- 
ference of  punishment  according  to  the  difference  in  the  nature 
and  number  of  their  evil  deeds  ;  that  they  will  suffer  positive  tor- 
ments awfully  great  in  degree  and  long  in  continuance,  in  pro- 
portion to  the  number  and  greatness  of  their  crimes ;  th-at  some 
of  them  will  suffer  for  ages  of  ages,  and  others  variously  in  pro- 
portion to  their  deserts,  and  that  they  will  suffer  the  wages  of 
sin,  etc.  Yet  at  the  same  time  he  holds  that  all  will  be  saved  by 
grace,  by  free  grace,  by  the  infinite  superabounding  mercy  and 
grace  of  God  ;  so  that  all  will  at  last  join  in  singing  glory  and 
honor  and  blessing  and  power  to  him  that  sitteth  on  the  throne, 
and  to  the  lamb  forever  and  ever.  But  how  can  these  things 
consist  ?  Surely  if  any  suffer  according  to  their  vices,  their  crimes, 
their  evil  deeds  ;  if  any  one  receive  the  wages  of  sin,  they  can- 
not be  saved  by  grace  at  all,  much  less  by  that  grace  which  is 
superabounding  and  infinite. 

(5)  It  follows  from  the  supposition  that  all  men  are  to  be 
saved  from  an  endless  punishment  through  Christ,  that  a  new  set 
of  threatenings  expressing  the  curse  of  the  lau',  and  that  eternal 
death  from  which  Christ  came  to  redeem  us,  must  be  discovered. 
They  who  allow  an  endless  punishment  of  the  wicked,  suppose 
there  are  many  passages  in  scripture  in  wiiich  such  a  punishment 


o 


432  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

is  plainly  threatened  ;  such  as  these :  "  Depart  ye  cursed  into 
everlasting  fire  ;" — "  These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punish- 
ment ;" — "  Who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction  ;" 
— "  Where  their  wornn  dieth  not,  and  their  fire  is  not  quenched  ;" 
— "  The  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  forever  and  ever." 

But  the  believers  in  universal  salvation  do  not  allow  that  these 
texts  threaten  an  endless  punishment.  Nor  indeed  can  they  al- 
low it,  consistently  with  their  favorite  doctrine.  Because  these 
texts,  at  the  same  time  that  they  point  out  to  us  the  curse  of  the 
law  and  the  punishment  which  sin  justly  deserves,  also  inform  and 
assure  us  that  some  men  will  actually  suflfer  that  punishment,  that 
some  shall  go  away  into  everlasting  punishment,  that  some  shall 
in  fact  be  punished  with  everlasting  destruction,  that  the  smoke 
of  the  torment  of  some  will  ascend  forever.  So  that  if  it  be  al- 
lowed that  these  texts  express  that  endless  punishment  which  is 
the  true  curse  of  the  law,  and  from  which  Christ  came  to  save  all 
men,  it  must  be  allowed  that  all  men  will  not  in  fact  be  saved. 
Therefore  in  order  that  the  advocates  for  universal  salvation  may 
support  the  present  supposition,  that  an  endless  punishment  is 
the  curse  of  the  law,  and  that  all  men  will  be  saved  from  it  through 
Christ,  they  must  point  out  a  new  set  of  threatenings  expressing 
the  endless  curse  of  the  law,  and  yet  not  assuring  us  that  some 
men  will  suffer  that  curse.  This  they  have  not  done,  nor  is  it 
presumed  will  they  be  able  to  do  it.  Thus  it  appears  that  all 
men  will  not  be  saved  through  Christ  from  an  endless  punish- 
ment. 

2.  Let  us  suppose  that  all  men  will  be  saved  through  Christ 
from  a  temporary  punishment.  This  temporary  punishment  must 
be  either  that  punishment  which  is  expressed  in  the  foremen- 
tioned  threatenings  ;  as  "  These  shall  go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment,"  and  "  the  smoke  of  their  torment  ascendeth  up  for- 
ever and  ever,"  or  some  temporary  punishment  of  longer  dura- 
tion. But  the  temporary  punishment  from  which  all  are  now 
supposed  to  be  saved  by  Christ,  is  not  that  which  is  expressed  in 
the  threatenings  just  mentioned  ;  for  it  is  granted  by  the  advo- 
cates for  universal  salvation  that  this  punishment  will  actually  be 
endured  by  a  number.  From  this  therefore  all  will  not  be  saved. 
If  it  be  said  that  all  will  be  saved  through  Christ  from  a  tempo- 
rary punishment  which  is,  or  was  to  be  of  a  longer  duration  than 
that  expressed  in  the  threatenings  above  quoted,  then  that  long- 
er temporary  punishment  is  the  curse  of  the  law.  But  it  cannot 
be  the  curse  of  the  law,  because  it  is  no  where  pointed  out  in 
the  law,  or  in  any  part  of  the  sacred  scriptures.  The  sacred 
scriptures  no  where  threaten  a  punishment  of  greater  duration 


WITH  SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  433 

than  that  everlasting  punishment  which  is  attended  with  a  smoke 
ascending  forever  and  ever.  And  to  say  that  this  supposed  longer 
temporary  punishment  is  the  curse  of  the  law  from  which  Christ 
redeemed  us  and  will  save  us,  when  no  sucii  curse  is  revealed  in 
tlie  sacred  scriptures,  is  to  the  highest  degree  irrational  and  ab- 
surd. Therefore  all  are  not  saved  by  Christ  from  a  temporary 
punishment. 

Thus  I  have  attempted  to  show  that  if  all  men  are  saved,  they 
are  not  saved  by  Christ ;  because  if  we  supj)osc  all  are  saved  by 
him,  they  are  saved  eitlier  from  an  endless,  or  from  a  temporary 
punishment.  But  it  cannot  be  supposed  that  all  men  are  saved 
by  Christ  from  an  endless  punishment,  unless  it  be  allowed  that 
they  were  justly  liable  to  such  a  punishment ;  that  it  may  be  in- 
flicted consistently  with  all  the  attributes  of  God  ;  that  all  the 
arguments  against  an  endless  punishment,  drawn  from  the  attri- 
butes of  God  are  to  be  relinquished  ;  that  no  man  can  suffer  a 
punishment  proportioned  or  equal  to  his  deserts  ;  and  that  sin  is 
an  infinite  evil,  as  by  the  present  supposition  it  deserves  an  end- 
less punishment ;  which  things  are  utterly  denied  by  those  who 
hold  to  the  salvation  of  all  men,  and  are  entirely  inconsistent 
with  their  system.  Further  it  appears  that  this  hypothesis  of 
Christ  saving  all  from  an  endless  punishment  cannot  be  main- 
tained, unless  another  set  of  threatenings  can  be  pointed  out  in 
scripture,  which  declare  the  curse  of  the  law  to  be  an  endless 
punislmicnt,  and  yet  do  not  at  the  same  time  assert  that  that  pun- 
ishnjent  shall  be  suffered  by  some.  Again ;  it  appears  that  all 
men  will  not  be  saved  by  Christ  from  a  temporary  punishment, 
whether  that  which  is  expressed  by  the  threatenings  of  "  ever- 
lasting punishment,"  etc.  or  any  longer  temporary  punishment. 
They  will  not  certainly  be  saved  from  that  punishment  whicii  is 
''everlasting,"  "forever  and  ever,"  etc.  because  it  is  granted  on 
all  hands  that  some  will  suffer  this  punishment.  And  if  we  sup- 
pose that  they  are  saved  by  Christ  from  a  longer  temporary  pun- 
ishment, then  that  longer  punishment  is  the  very  one  which  is 
threatened  in  the  law,  and  is  the  curse  of  the  law.  Yet  no  such 
longer  temporary  punishment  is  threatened  in  the  law,  and  there- 
fore it  is  not  the  curse  of  the  law  from  whicli  Christ  came  to  save 
us. 

II.  It  remains  for  us  to  attend  to  the  other  hypothesis  made 
in  the  beginning  of  this  discourse,  viz.  That  all  men  will 
indeed  be  saved,  but  not  through  the  atonement  of  Christ. 

It  may  be  said  that  Christ  came  to  atone  for  the  sins  of  all, 
and  to  offer  salvation  to  all  ;  that  they  who  repent  and  believe  in 
him  in  this  life  will  be  saved  through  him  ;  and  that  those  who 

37* 


434  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

die  in  impenitence  shall  suffer  the  proper  punishment  of  sin,  and 
then  be  discharged  and  admitted  to  eternal  salvation,  but  not  by 
the  redemption  of  Christ. 

On  this  view  of  the  subject,  I  observe  :  That  those  who  are 
saved  according  to  this  supposition,  without  the  atonement  of 
Christ,  are  either  entitled  to  salvation  on  the  footing  of  justice, 
so  that  they  cannot  be  kept  out  of  it  without  injury,  or  they  have 
no  claim  to  it  on  the  footing  of  justice,  and  are  therefore  saved 
by  the  absolute  sovereign  grace  of  God.  Let  us  consider  both 
these  hypotheses. 

1.  The  first  is,  that  those  who  die  in  impenitence  are  finally 
saved  on  the  footing  of  justice,  and  cannot  he  excluded  from 
salvation  without  injury.  From  this  hypothesis  will  follow 
these  consequences. 

(1)  That  if  this  be  the  idea  of  those  who  believe  in  the  salva- 
tion of  all  men,  they  must  give  up  all  those  passages  of  scripture 
from  which  they  have  hitherto  endeavored  to  prove  the  salvation 
of  all  men  ;  such  as  these  :  "  That  Christ  gave  himself  a  ransom 
for  all ;"  "  that  he  hath  tasted  death  for  every  man  ;"  "  that  he 
is  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world  ;"  and  that  "  as 
in  Adam  all  died,  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive."  For 
these  texts,  if  they  prove  universal  salvation  at  all,  prove  that  it 
is  through  Christ,  which  is  contrary  to  the  supposition  now  be- 
fore us. 

The  same  observations  are  applicable  to  that  text  so  much  in- 
sisted on  in  this  controversy,  recorded  in  Rom.  5:  18,  "As  by 
the  offence  of  one,  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condemna- 
tion ;  even  so  by  the  righteousness  of  one,  the  free  gift  came  up- 
on all  men  unto  justification  of  life."  Tiiis  text  speaks  of  no  sal- 
vation but  that  which  is  through  the  obedience  of  one,  who  is 
Christ.  Again,  Rom.  8:  21,  is  a  favorite  text  with  the  believers 
in  the  salvation  of  all  men.  The  words  are  :  "  The  creature  it- 
self also  shall  be  delivered  from  the  bondage  of  corruption  into 
the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God."  But  these  children 
are  those  mentioned  in  the  17th  verse,  who  are  there  said  to  be 
"  heirs  of  God  and  joint  heirs  with  Christ."  They  are  again  spo- 
ken of  in  the  32d  verse,  "  He  that  spared  not  his  own  Son,  but 
delivered  him  up  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with  him  also  freely 
give  us  all  things."  And  throughout  this  chapter  the  apostle 
speaks  of  salvation  through  Christ  only.  If  therefore  all  man- 
kind are  to  be  brought  into  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of 
God,  they  are  doubtless  to  be  brought  to  it  through  Christ,  and 
in  consequence  of  his  being  delivered  up  for  them,  which  is  con- 
trary to  the  present  supposition.  Therefore  this  text  is  nothing 
to  the  purpose. 


WITH  SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  435 

Another  principal  argument  for  the  salvation  of  all  men,  is 
drawn  from  1  Cor.  15:-24,  26,  "Then  cometh  the  end  when  he 
shall  have  put  down  all  rule,  and  all  authority  and  power.  For 
he  must  reign  till  he  hath  put  all  enemies  under  his  feet.  The 
last  enemy  that  shall  be  destroyed  is  death."  Another  is  drawn 
from  Col.  1:  20,  "  And,  having  made  peace  through  the  blood  of 
the  cross,  by  him  to  reconcile  all  tilings  unto  himself;  by  him,  I 
say,  whether  they  be  things  in  earth  or  things  in  heaven."  Again, 
Eph.  1:  10,  is  brought  as  a  proof  of  universal  salvation  :  "  That 
in  the  dispensation  of  the  fulness  of  time,  he  might  gather  to- 
gether in  one  all  things  in  Christ,  both  which  are  in  heaven,  and 
which  are  on  earth,  even  in  him."  Again,  Heb.  2:  8,  "  Thou 
hast  put  all  things  in  subjection  under  his  feet.  For  in  that  he 
put  all  in  subjection  under  him,  he  left  nothing  that  is  not  put 
under  him."  But  if  these  texts  prove  that  all  men  are  to  be 
saved  at  all,  they  prove  that  all  men  are  to  be  saved  through 
Christ,  through  his  redemption,  through  his  cross,  through  his 
blood,  through  his  death,  which  he  tasted  for  every  man,  etc.  as 
is  manifest  by  the  texts  themselves  and  their  contexts,  and  there- 
fore they  are  not  to  the  purpose  of  the  hypothesis  now  under 
consideration  ;  and  those  who  hold  that  all  men  will  indeed  be 
saved,  but  not  through  Christ,  must  never  more  plead  these  texts 
which  are  indeed,  as  they  say,  the  principal  ground  of  their  de- 
pendence in  this  controversy. 

(2)  If  we  go  on  this  hypothesis,  we  must  give  up  all  idea  of 
salvation  by  grace  in  the  case  of  those  who  are  saved  out  of  hell. 
If  a  man  suffer  an  adequate  punishment  for  his  sins,  and  then 
is  delivered  from  further  punishment  on  the  footing  of  justice, 
surely  there  is  no  grace,  no  favor  in  this.  It  is  a  matter  of  right 
and  justice,  not  of  grace.  On  the  mere  ground  of  right,  he  may 
demand  exemption  from  further  punishment,  as  much  as  the  man 
who  being  condemned  to  receive  a  certain  number  of  stripes,  af- 
ter having  received  them,  has  a  right  on  the  footing  of  justice  to 
demand  deliverance  ;  and  if  he  is  not  exempted,  but  is  punished 
any  further,  then  he  suffers  downright  injustice  and  injury. 

But  here  it  may  be  pleaded,  that  though  there  is  no  grace  in 
delivering  from  furtlier  punishment  the  man  who  has  already  suf- 
fered an  adequate  punishment  for  his  sins,  yet  there  is  grace  in 
admitting  him  to  the  positive  happiness  of  heaven,  and  tliat  in 
this  consists  the  proper  grace  of  the  gospel  with  respect  to  those 
who  die  in  impenitence  ;  that  though  they  do  not  deserve  any 
further  punishment  and  so  are  liberated  on  the  footing  of  justice, 
yet  tiiey  do  not  deserve  heaven,  and  its  positive  enjoyments  ; 
yea,  that  they  deserve  or  can  claim,  nothing  more  than  a  state  of 


43^  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

existence  which  is  barely  more  than  non-existence  ;  that  there- 
fore whatever  beyond  this  is  given  them  is  the  fruit  of  mere  grace, 
and  that  in  this  sense  all  are  saved  by  grace.     On  this  1  observe, 

[1]  This  is  merely  quibbling  on  the  word  grace.  If  by  grace 
be  meant  the  same  as  goodness,  it  is  granted  that  any  degree  of 
happiness  conferred  on  any  creature,  which  is  preferable  to  non- 
existence is  the  efllect  of  grace.  In  this  sense  the  angels  in  hea- 
ven are  saved  by  grace,  though  they  are  saved  entirely  on  the 
footing  of  law,  and  of  the  covenant  of  works.  In  this  sense 
our  first  parents,  yea  all  mankind  are  created  by  grace.  In  this 
sense  the  revealed  law  is  the  fruit  of  grace,  as  truly  as  the  gospel. 
In  this  sense  the  creation  of  the  animal  and  inanimate  world  is 
the  fruit  of  grace. 

But  how  does  this  idea  of  grace  accord  with  the  sacred  scrip- 
tures ?  Rom.  10:  5,  "  Moses  describeth  the  righteousness  which 
is  of  the  law,  That  the  man  that  doeth  these  things  shall  live  by 
them."  But  the  elect  angels  have  the  righteousness  which  is  of 
the  law,  and  therefore  live  by  doing  the  things  of  the  law,  and 
not  by  grace.  Rom.  11:6,  "If  by  grace,  then  it  is  no  more  of 
works  ;  otherwise  grace  is  no  more  grace.  But  if  it  be  of  works, 
then  it  is  no  more  of  grace  ;  otherwise  work  is  no  more  work." 
Here  it  is  manifest  that  the  apostle  distinguishes  between  those 
effects  of  divine  goodness  which  are  founded  on  works,  or  obe- 
dience to  the  law,  and  those  which  are  founded  on  grace.  But 
the  happiness  of  the  elect  angels  is  founded  on  their  obedience, 
and  therefore  is  not  in  the  language  of  the  apostle,  the  effect  or 
fruit  of  grace.  No  more  is  the  salvation  or  happiness  of  those  who 
having  suffered  an  adequate  punishment  for  their  sins,  are  tiience- 
forward  to  be  considered  and  treated,  as  in  the  sight  of  the  law 
innocent,  and  as  such  are  admitted  to  the  joys  of  heaven.  Yet 
such  are  admitted  to  the  joys  of  heaven  in  the  way  of  goodness, 
inasmuch  as  however  innocent,  they  have  no  right  to  claim  those 
joys  on  the  footing  of  justice. 

Agreeably  to  this  distinction  between  grace  and  goodness,  the 
gospel  is  called  in  Acts  20:  24,  "  The  gospel  of  the  grace  of  God." 
And  John  1:  17,  "  The  law  was  given  by  Moses,  but  grace  and 
truth  came  by  Jesus  Christ."  It  is  plain  that  in  these  words,  the 
giving  of  the  law  is  not  considered  as  a  fruit  of  grace  ;  yet  it 
was  undoubtedly  the  fruit  of  goodness.  Therefore  to  use  the 
words  grace  and  goodness  as  synonymous,  is  to  renounce  the 
sense  which  the  sacred  scriptures  attach  to  these  words,  and  to 
impose  an  arbitrary  sense  of  our  own. 

[2]  The  idea  of  salvation  which  we  are  now  considering  en- 
tirely precludes  all  forgiveness  or  pardon.     They  who  suffer  the 


WITH   SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  437 

proper  punishment  of  their  sins,  a  punishment  proportioned  to  their 
deserts,  carmot  be  the  objects  of  forgiveness.  What  is  forgiven 
them  ?  They  suffer  the  full  punishment  of  sin  ;  no  part  of  tliat 
punishment  is  abated,  or  remitted  to  them.  But  the  gospel  is 
wholly  ignorant  of  any  salvation,  which  is  not  in  the  way  of 
forgiveness.  That  this  is  so  will  be  evident  from  a  few  passages 
of  scripture,  to  which  I  would  refer.  Luke  1:  76,  77,  "Thou, 
child,  shall  be  called  the  prophet  of  the  highest ;  for  thou  shalt 
go  before  the  face  of  the  Lord  to  prepare  his  ways  ;  to  give 
knowledge  of  salvation  unto  his  people,  by  or  in  remission  of 
their  sins."  So  that  the  salvation  which  John  the  Baptist  was  to 
make  known  was  to  be  attended  with  remission  of  sins.  Luke 
24:  47,  "  That  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preach- 
ed in  his  name  atnong  all  nations."  This  is  a  part  of  that  dis- 
course in  which  our  Lord  finally  took  leave  of  his  disciples,  after 
his  resurrection  ;  and  in  these  words  he  virtually  gives  them  their 
commission  to  preach  the  gospel.  In  this  commission  there  is 
not  only  no  intimation  that  any  who  repent  and  are  saved  are 
not,  at  the  same  time  made  the  s\ih\ec\s  of  fo7'giveness  ;  but  re- 
pentance and  remission  of  sins  are  expressly  connected,  and  the 
plain  meaning  is,  that  all  who  repent,  shall  be  subjects  of  forgive- 
ness. Acts  10:  43,  "To  him  give  all  the  prophets  witness,  that 
through  his  name  whosoever  believeth  in  him,  shall  receive  re- 
mission of  sins."  It  is  granted  by  all  the  advocates  for  universal 
salvation  that  all  men,  before  they  are  admitted  to  heaven  will 
repent  and  believe  in  Christ ;  and  this  text  declares  that  whoso- 
ever believeth  in  him  shall  receive  remission  of  sins  ;  of  which 
however  there  is  no  possibility  on  the  supposition  now  under  con- 
sideration. 

Rom.  3:  25,  "  Whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation 
through  faith  in  his  blood  to  declare  his  righteousness  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins  that  are  past."  All  those  who  plead  for  the  sal- 
vation of  all  men,  however  they  may  renounce  the  atonement 
yet  hold  that  salvation  is  by  Christ,  as  the  immediate  author  or 
dispenser.  But  this  text  assures  us  that  Christ  is  set  forth  for  the 
remission  of  sins,  and  that  the  salvation  which  he  dispenses  is  al- 
ways attended  with  such  remission. 

Heb.  10:  16 — 19,  "  This  is  the  covenant  that  I  will  make  with 
them  after  those  days,  saith  the  Lord.  I  will  put  may  laws  in 
your  hearts,  and  in  your  minds  will  I  write  them  ;  and  their  sins, 
and  iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more.  Now  where  remission  of 
these  is,  there  is  no  more  offering  for  sin."  The  covenant  spoken 
of  in  this  passage  is  not  the  new  covenant  or  the  covenant  of  the 
gospel.     This  I  presume  is  not  denied.     Now  the  sins  of  those 


438  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

who  are  to  enjoy  the  blessings  or  salvation  of  this  covenant,  will 
be  remembered  no  more,  whicii  the  apostle  explains  to  mean  a  re- 
mission of  their  sins.  So  that  all  who  are  ever  to  be  saved  ac- 
cording to  the  gospel,  (and  the  present  question  concerns  such 
only,  as  we  are  not  now  disputing  with  those  who  reject  the  gos- 
pel ;)  are  to  be  saved  in  the  way  of  remission  of  their  sins.  Col. 
1:  14,  "In  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood  even 
the  forgiveness  of  sins."  Whatever  be  intended  by  redemption 
through  the  blood  of  Christ,  doubtless  it  implies  that  salvation 
which  he  dispenses  ;  and  that,  it  seems,  implies  the  forgiveness  of 
sins.  Acts  26:  18.  Here  we  are  informed  that  Paul  was  sent  to 
the  gentiles,  '*  To  open  their  eyes  and  to  turn  them  from  darkness 
to  light,  and  from  the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that  they  may 
receive  forgiveness  of  their  sins,  and  inheritance  among  them 
which  are  sanctified."  Ch.  13:  38,  39,  "  Be  it  known  unto  you  that 
through  this  man  is  preached  unto  you  forgiveness  of  sins;  and 
by  him,  all  that  believe  are  justified  from  all  things  from  which  ye 
could  not  be  justified  by  the  law  of  Moses."  Ch.  5:  31,  "  Him 
hath  God  exalted  with  his  right  hand  to  be  a  prince  and  a  Sa- 
vior, for  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and  forgiveness  of  sins." 
Therefore  to  all  whom  he  saves,  he  not  only  gives  repentance, 
but  also  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins.  1  John  1:9,  '•  If  we  con- 
fess our  sins,  he  is  fiiithful  and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to 
cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteousness."  But  all  v.'ho  repent,  will 
confess  their  sins  and  so  receive  forgiveness.  Mark  4:  12,  "  Lest 
at  any  time  they  should  be  converted  and  their  sins  should  be 
forgiven  them."  But  all  who  repent  are  converted,  and  there- 
fore forgiven.  Isa.  55:  7,  "  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  way,  and 
the  unrighteous  man  his  thoughts,  and  let  him  return  unto  the 
Lord  and  he  will  have  mercy  upon  him,  and  to  our  God  for  he 
will  abundantly  pardon."  Rom.  4:  6,  7,  "  Even  as  David  also 
describeth  the  blessedness  of  the  man  unto  whom  God  imputeth 
righteousness  without  works,  saying,  blessed  are  they  whose  ini- 
quities are  forgiven  and  whose  sins  are  covered.  Blessed  is  the 
man  to  whom  the  Lord  will  not  impute  sin." 

I  have  quoted  these  texts  to  prove  that  the  way  of  salvation 
revealed  in  the  gospel  is  by  forgiveness  of  sins,  which  entirely 
overthrows  the  supposition,  that  the  damned  will  suffer  the  full 
punisiunent  of  their  sins.  Nor  can  I  see  any  possible  mode  of 
attempting  to  evade  the  force  of  these  texts,  but  by  supposing  that 
they  refer  only  to  those  who  repent  and  believe  in  this  life,  and 
that  those  who  are  brought  to  repentance  in  the  future  world  will 
receive  no  forgiveness. 

But  to  this  supposition  I  answer,  that  so  long  as  the  salvation 


WITH  SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  439 

of  all  men  is  attempted  to  be  supported  on  the  i^round  of  scrip- 
ture, its  advocates  are  bound  to  show  that  the  idea  of  the  salva- 
tion of  some  without  forgiveness  is  to  be  found  in  the  sacred 
scriptures ;  which  they  have  not  yet  attempted  to  show.  Until 
they  do  this  and  give  some  probable  construction  to  the  texts  first 
quoted  to  prove  that  all  who  exercise  repentance  and  faith,  or 
obtain  an  interest  in  the  new  covenant,  are  fnade  the  subjects  of 
forgiveness,  we  have  a  right  to  consider  the  present  evasion,  as 
a  mere  evasion,  not  only  destitute  of  proof,  but  opposed  to  the 
positive  representations  of  scriptures  just  now  produced. 

(3)  The  supposition,  that  those  who  die  in  impenitence  are  all 
finally  saved  on  the  footing  of  justice,  not  only  sets  aside  the 
atonement  of  Christ,  but  also  his  mediation.  By  a  mediator  is 
commonly  meant  one  who  interposes  between  two  others  who 
are  at  variance  in  order  to  effect  a  reconciliation.  But  how  does 
Christ,  on  the  present  supposition,  mediate  between  God  and 
those  who  die  in  impenitence ;  or  what  reconciliation  does  he  ef- 
fect ?  None  at  all.  He  leaves  them  at  perfect  variance,  till  the 
latter  have  sustained  all  the  eflects  of  the  divine  wrath  that  justice 
can  inflict.  Then  they  are  delivered,  not  by  virtue  of  his  medi- 
ation, but  by  virtue  of  their  own  sufterings. 

The  same  may  be  said  of  his  intercession.  He  is  said  to  make 
continual  intercession  for  us,  and  to  be  our  advocate  with  the 
Father.  But  what  advantage  have  those  who  die  in  impenitence 
by  his  intercession,  or  by  all  that  he  does  as  an  advocate  ?  They 
are  still  left  in  the  hands  of  strict  and  rigorous  justice,  till  they 
have  paid  the  uttermost  farthing. 

If  it  be  said  that  Christ  mediates  and  intercedes  to  procure  for 
them  the  positive  blessings  of  heaven  ;  I  answer,  this  represents 
the  character  of  God  the  Father  in  a  very  unfavorable  light,  that 
though  all  sin  is  atoned  for  and  every  obstacle  removed  out  of 
the  way,  so  that  in  the  eye  of  the  law  the  man  is  perfectly  inno- 
cent, yet  God  of  himself  has  no  heart  to  bestow  on  him  such  posi- 
tive blessings  as  wisdom  and  goodness  recommend,  and  therefore 
in  order  to  procure  them,  Christ  must  become  a  mediator  and 
humble  intercessor.  Now  it  is  manifest  that  there  is  no  need  of 
mediation  and  intercession  in  this  case ;  and  that  the  divine 
goodness  itself  is  disposed  to  flow  out  in  all  wise  and  proper 
communications  of  happiness  to  creatures,  when  once  satisfaction 
is  made  for  their  sins.  As  well  may  we  suppose  that  God  the 
Father  has  no  heart  to  communicate  that  happiness  which  wisdom 
and  goodness  recommend  in  behalf  of  the  elect  angels,  and  that 
Christ  must  mediate  and  intercede,  to  persuade  him  to  it.  The 
very  idea  of  such  a  mediation  and  intercession  suggests  a  false- 


440  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

hood ;  which  is,  that  the  objects  of  it  are  sinners,  and  deserve  at 
least  neglect,  if  not  more  positive  punishment. 

I  know  that  men  of  a  certain  class  give  a  peculiar  explanation 
of  the  scripture  words  mediator  and  intercessor.  A  mediator, 
say  they,  is  one  who  secures  the  accomplishment  of  promised 
blessings,  and  our  Lord  makes  intercession  for  us  by  regulating 
and  managing,  as  our  friend  and  agent,  all  the  affairs  pertaining 
to  our  salvation.  But  in  the  case  before  us,  Christ  secures  the 
accomplishment  of  no  promised  blessings.  He  does  not  secure 
deliverance  from  punishment,  because  this  they  sufler  to  the  ut- 
termost. And  how  can  it  be  said  that  he  secures  the  promise  of 
eternal  life  and  positive  happiness  ?  If  God  hath  promised  these, 
they  are  by  virtue  of  that  promise  absolutely  secure  ;  and  what 
can  Christ  do  to  make  them  more  secure  ?  The  very  idea  of 
Christ's  being  appointed  to  secure  the  accomplishment  of  what 
God  hath  promised,  appears  to  savor  of  impiety,  as  if  God  stood 
in  need  of  a  surety  to  gain  him  credit. 

Again  ;  if  Christ  negotiates  and  manages,  as  their  friend  and 
agent,  the  affairs  pertaining  to  the  salvation  of  those  who  die  in 
impenitence,  still  I  ask  what  is  the  advantage  of  all  this  ?  What 
do  they  gain  by  his  repentance  ?  Not  deliverance  from  misery  ; 
not  pardon  ;  and  as  to  any  positive  blessings  which  wisdom  re- 
commends to  be  bestowed  on  them,  is  God  so  averse  to  bestow 
them  that  he  is  not  to  be  prevailed  on  to  do  it,  but  in  conse- 
quence of  the  long  and  painful  negotiation  of  his  own  Son  ? 
Thus  we  ar,e  brought  into  the  same  difficulty  as  before  ;  so  that 
on  the  whole,  there  seems  to  be  no  reconciling  the  mediation  and 
intercession  of  Christ,  with  the  idea  that  some  men  are  saved  in 
consequence  of  their  having  suffered  a  punishment  according  to 
their  deserts. 

(4)  On  this  same  hypothesis,  where  is  there  ground  or  reason 
for  considering,  or  calling  Christ  a  Savior  in  any  sense?  He  no 
more  saves  those  who  suffer  according  to  their  deserts,  than  the 
executive  officer  saves  the  criminal  who  hatli  suffered  the  whole 
punishment  to  which  he  was  condemned,  and  then  is  discharged 
by  him.  Christ  is  said  to  save  us  "  from  wrath,"  and  to  deliver 
us  from  "  the  wrath  to  come."  But  he  does  not  save  those  from 
wrath  who  suffer  all  the  wrath  to  which  they  are  exposed. 

As  to  the  evasion  before  mentioned,  that  Christ  is  a  Savior,  as 
he  introduces  to  the  positive  happiness  of  heaven  ;  I  observe,  that 
this  is  no  deliverance,  and  yet  Christ  is  said  to  deliver  us  from  the 
wrath  to  come,  and  this  is  the  proper  idea  of  a  Savior,  as  when 
Christ  is  said  to  save  his  people  from  their  sins.  If  the  whole 
that  Christ  does,   is  to  take  sinners  out  of  hell  when  they  have 


WITH   SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  441 

suffered  their  full  punishment,  and  introduce  them  into  heaven, 
there  appears  to  be  no  necessity  that  this  should  be  done  by  Christ, 
for  it  might  as  well,  so  far  as  we  can  see,  have  been  done  by  the 
Father  immediately,  and  if  it  had  been  done  by  him,  he  would  have 
been  in  every  sense  as  much  their  Savior  as  Jesus  Christ  is  on  the 
present  supposition.  Nay,  he  is  now  in  the  same  sense,  the  Sa- 
vior of  the  elect  angels.  Besides,  why  might  not  an  angel,  or 
almost  any  creature  have  been  em|)loyed  in  this  business  ?  It  ap- 
pears to  be  nothing  more  arduous  or  honorable  than  the  conduct- 
ing to  iieaven  of  the  departing  spirits  of  saints,  as  they  decease  from 
this  life.  And  if  this  last  mentioned  work  be,  as  is  generally  sup- 
posed, performed  by  angels,  why  may  not  they  on  that  account, 
be  called  the  Saviors  of  men,  as  Christ  is  so  called  because  he  con- 
ducts them  from  hell  to  heaven  when  they  have  suffered  the  full 
punishment  of  their  sins  ? 

Before  I  proceed  any  further,  I  cannot  but  make  one  reflection 
on  this  whole  hypothesis  of  salvation  on  the  footing  of  justice, 
and  not  by  an  atonement  made  by  Christ.  How  contrary  it  is  to 
the  scripture  representations  of  the  scheme  of  salvation  "  through 
Christ,"  ''  by  the  sacrifice  of  him."  "  by  his  blood,"  "  by  grace 
and  mercy  and  forgiveness,"  "  by  the  mediation  and  intercession 
of  Christ,"  and  "  through  him  as  a  Savior  !"  The  one  lays  a 
foundation  for  everlasting  gratitude  ;  but  on  this  scheme  we  can 
and  need  give  no  thanks  for  our  deliverance. 

2.  It  is  now  time  to  consider  the  other  supposition  before  stated, 
viz.  That  those  toho  die  in  impenitence  are  finally  saved  not 
on  the  footing  of  justice,  but  of  the  absolute  sovereign  grace 
of  God,  without  any  respect  to  the  atonement,  mediation  or  in- 
tercession of  Christ.  With  respect  to  this,  several  observations 
occur. 

(1)  It  implies  that  they  deserve  not  to  be  saved,  and  that  they 
might  consistently  with  justice  be  left  in  eternal  punishment  or 
death  ;  that  so  to  leave  them  is  not  at  all  inconsistent  with  the  di- 
vine attributes;  and  that  all  arguments  from  the  greatness  of  the 
punishment,  or  from  the  divine  justice  and  goodness,  are  to  be 
entirely  relinquished.  Because  the  supposition  is  that  they  are 
saved  by  grace,  and  not  by  justice. 

(2)  This  hypothesis  implies  that  an  endless  punishment  is  the 
curse  of  the  law  demanded  in  scripture.  For  that  punishment 
which  is  justly  due  to  sin  is  the  very  punishment  threatened  in 
the  law.  The  law  is  founded  on  strict  justice,  and  tiie  very  end 
of  the  threatening  is  to  point  out  that  punishment  which  is  just- 
ly due.  or  to  which   the  sinner  is  justly  exposed.     To  suppose 

Vol.  II.  38 


442  UNIVERSAL   SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

otherwise  is  to  change  the  law  into  gospel,  and  to  confound  jus- 
tice and  grace. 

(3)  But  where  is  this  expressed  in  all  the  sacred  scriptures  ? 
It  is  not  in  the  texts  already  quoted,  viz.  "  that  these  shall  go 
away  into  everlasting  punishment,"  '•'  and  the  smoke  of  their  tor- 
ment ascendeth  up  forever  and  ever,"  etc.  because  these  texts  assure 
us  that  the  punishment  which  they  threaten  will  he  actually  inflic- 
ted, and  therefore  in  this  understanding  of  them,  they  at  once 
overthrow  universal  salvation.  And  if  these  are  not  the  curse  of 
the  law,  denouncing  an  endless  punishment  I  presume  no  other 
can  be  pointed  out  from  scripture  which  will  not  equally  disprove 
the  salvation  of  all  men. 

We  have  now  considered  the  several  particulars  which  arise 
from  the  proposed  method  of  our  discourse.  We  have  observed 
that  if  all  are  to  be  saved,  they  will  be  saved  either  through  the 
atonement  of  Christ  or  not ;  that  if  they  are  to  be  saved  through 
Christ,  they  will  be  saved  by  him,  either  from  endless  or  from  a 
temporary  punishment ;  and  again  that  if  all  are  not  saved  through 
the  atonement  of  Christ,  they  are  to  be  saved  either  on  the  foot- 
ing of  justice,  or  on  the  footing  of  God's  absolute  grace  ;  and  it 
appears  that  every  one  of  these  various  suppositions  is  irreconcil- 
able with  the  gospel,  and  leads  to  inexplicable  difficulties  and  ab- 
surdities. Therefore  the  doctrine  itself  from  which  these  absurdi- 
ties follow,  must  be  false  and  absurd,  and  as  such  must  be  relin- 
quished by  all  who  mean  to  embrace  a  consistent  system. 

Here,  however,  it  may  be  objected  ;  that  the  end  of  future  pun- 
ishment is  not  vindictive,  but  disciplinary ;  and  that  Christ  is 
made  head  over  all  things  on  purpose  to  recover  mankind  ;  that 
to  this  end  he  employs  the  most  proper  means,  using  such  as  are 
sufficient  to  lead  some  to  repentance  in  this  life,  while  with  re- 
gard to  others  he  uses  those  means  which  will  be  more  effectual 
in  the  world  to  come.  On  this  objection  or  plea  I  make  the  fol- 
lowing queries  and  remarks  : 

1.  Do  those  who  die  in  sin  deserve  any  more  punishment  than 
is  sufficient  to  lead  them  to  repentance,  or  not  ?  If  they  do  de- 
serve more,  that  more,  that  greater  punishment  is  the  curse  of  the 
law.  But  what  punishment  is  this  ?  Not  that  everlasting  pun- 
ishment to  which  the  wicked  shall  actually  go,  because  this  being 
the  punishment  to  which  they  shall  go,  is,  on  the  present  supposi- 
tion, that  very  punishment  which  is  necessary  to  lead  them  to 
repentance.  But  if  the  punishment  which  they  justly  deserve  is 
a  longer  punishment  than  this,  where  is  it  threatened?  No  ac- 
count can  possibly  be  given  of  it. 

Besides,  if  they  deserve  a  longer  punishment  than  that  which 


WITH   SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  443 

IS  sufficient  to  lead  them  to  repentance,  how  much  longer  may  it 
be  ?  Is  it  still  a  temporary  punishment  or  an  endless  one  ?  If  a 
temporary  one,  this  temporary  punishment  is  longer  than  that 
which  the  scripture  speaks  of  as  being  "  forever  and  ever,"  and 
is  the  very  curse  of  the  law.  But  where  is  the  curse  of  the  law 
to  be  found  ?  Where  is  it  threatened  ?  If  it  be  granted  that 
the  punishment  which  the  wicked  deserve,  is  so  much  longer  than 
that  which  is  necessary  to  lead  them  to  repentance,  that  it  is  ai)- 
solutely  endless,  then  two  consequences  will  follow,  both  very  puz- 
zling to  the  advocates  for  universal  salvation.  The  first  is,  that 
this  endless  punishment  which  is  the  curse  of  the  law,  is  not,  ac- 
cording their  sense  of  scripture,  to  be  found  in  the  law,  nor  in 
any  part  of  the  bible  ;  and  tlic  second  is,  that  an  endless  punish- 
ment is  perfectly  just  and  consistent  with  the  divine  perfections  ; 
therefore  all  arguments  against  it  on  that  ground  are  to  be  aban- 
doned. 

2.  But  if  the  other  part  of  the  dilemma  should  be  espoused, 
that  those  who  die  in  sin  do  not  deserve  any  more  punishment 
than  is  necessary  to  lead  them  to  repentance,  it  will  follow, 

(1)  That  they  are  saved  without  forgiveness.  They  suffer  all 
that  they  deserve  and  therefore  there  is  no  room  for  the  exercise 
of  forgiveness  or  grace.     It  will  follow, 

(•2)  That  repentance  is  the  curse  of  the  law.  On  this  suppo- 
sition all  that  the  law  requires  of  the  sinner  is  repentance.  As 
soon  as  he  renders  this,  the  law  is  satisfied  ;  and  the  punishment 
which  is  inflicted  is  not  by  way  of  vengeance  or  wrath,  but  mere- 
ly as  a  wholesome  discipline  to  lead  to  this.  His  punishment  is 
no  more  of  a  vindictive  nature  than  the  afflictions  of  God's  chil- 
dren in  this  life  ;  nay,  no  more  than  the  preaching  of  the  gospel, 
or  any  of  the  means  of  grace.  Therefore  the  sentence  of  the  law 
is,  "  If  you  sin,  you  shall  repent ;  and  you  shall,  unless  you  do  re- 
pent, be  subjected  to  the  various  means  the  most  excellently 
adapted  to  lead  you  to  repentance,  that  divine  wisdom  can  de- 
vise or  apply  ;  that  is,  you  shall  be  cursed  with  the  greatest  bless- 
ings that  you  in  a  state  of  impenitence  can  be  blessed  with  until 
you  are  cursed  with  repentance  itself,  which  is  the  great  curse  of 
the  divine  law,  and  yet  to  yourself  the  greatest  blessing.  It  will 
follow, 

(3)  That  Christ  came  to  redeem  us  from  repentance.  He 
came  to  redeem  us  from  the  curse  of  the  law  ;  and  this  being  re- 
pentance, he  came  to  redeem  or  save  us  from  it.  Yet  this  is  so 
far  from  being  the  curse  of  the  law,  from  which  Christ  came  to 
rescue  us,  that  it  is  one  of  the  chief  blessings  of  the  gospel  which 
Christ  was  exalted  on  purpose  to  give. 

3.  Would  it  be  just  to  leave  sinners  to  final  and  endless  impen- 


444  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT 

itence  ?  If  it  be  just,  then  it  is  just  to  leave  them  to  an  endless 
punishment ;  for  the  former  necessarily  infers  the  latter.  And 
then  the  consequences  which  we  have  before  mentioned  will  fol- 
low, which  are  that  all  arguments  against  endless  punishment 
from  the  divine  perfections,  and  from  the  cruelty  of  such  punish- 
ment, must  be  given  up  ;  and  that  a  new  set  of  threatcnings  de- 
nouncing an  endless  punishment  as  just,  and  not  at  the  same  time 
assuring  us  that  it  will  be  inflicted,  must  be  discovered  in  the  sa- 
cred scriptures.  If  it  be  said,  that  it  will  not  be  just  to  leave  a 
sinner  to  final  impenitence,  then  when  the  sinner  is  brought  to  re- 
pentance, no  more  is  done  than  an  act  of  justice,  which  he  might 
demand  as  his  right,  and  he  receives  no  favor,  no  forgiveness ; 
and  not  to  give  him  repentance,  and  all  benefits  consistent  with 
wisdom,  would  be  at  least  as  derogatory  to  the  character  of  our 
heavenly  Father,  as  it  would  be  to  that  of  an  earthly  parent,  who 
for  some  ordinary  offence  should  deliver  up  his  child  to  the  most 
abandoned  courses,  without  using  means  to  reclaim  him  and  ac- 
tually to  lead  him  to  repentance. 

4.  How  can  the  idea  that  future  punishment  is  only  disciplin- 
ary consist  with  the  various  declarations  of  the  scripture  that 
those  who  die  in  sin  are  "  lost,"  "  perishing,"  suffer  "perdition," 
are  "  cast  away,"  "  are  burnt  up,"  etc.  ?  While  they  are  in  hell 
they  are  no  more  lost,  than  while  they  are  under  the  discipline 
of  providence,  in  this  world.  Nay,  they  are  with  respect  to  their 
true  interest  in  no  worse  situation  than  they  are  in  this  world,  but 
in  a  vastly  better,  as  they  will  be  under  means  of  grace  vastly 
more  conducive  to  their  highest  happiness  and  salvation,  than 
what  they  enjoy  here. 

5.  How  is  this  hypothesis  consistent  with  the  declarations  of 
scripture  ;  that  the  damned  are  under  the  wrath  of  God  ;  that 
they  are  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  to  destruction  ;  that  God  will  ren- 
der vengeance  to  them  ;  that  he  will  reward  them  according  to 
their  deeds,  their  works,  the  things  done  in  the  body,  the  fruit 
of  their  doings,  etc.  ?  Surely  these  expressions  exhibit  something 
more  than  mere  discipline,  something  vindictive. 

6.  The  sentence  pronounced  on  the  damned  seems  utterly  in- 
consistent with  the  idea  that  they  are  to  be  liberated  each  one 
as  soon  as  he  repents.  For  to  all  those  on  the  left  hand  the  judge 
will  say  "  depart  ye  cursed  into  everlasting  fire  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels."  And  so  in  all  the  other  passages  in  which 
we  are  informed  of  the  sentence  pronounced  on  the  wicked,  there 
is  no  intimation  that  they  are  doomed  to  a  punishment  of  various 
duration,  according  to  the  various  time  of  their  repentance  ;  but 
the  contrary  is  everywhere  held  forth — that  all  of  them  alike  are 
to  suffer  forever  ! 


WITH  SALVATION  BY  CHRIST.  445 


IMPROVEMENT. 


1.  If  the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation  cannot  be  any  better 
reconciled  with  salvation  by  Christ,  than  has  been  represented, 
then  neither  can  it  be  reconciled  with  the  belief  of  divine  revela- 
tion. I  mean  not  that  all  who  believe  in  universal  salvation  are 
infidels.  I  allow  the  contrary.  Still  that  doctrine  cannot  be  as- 
sented to  consistently  with  a  belief  of  revelation.  They  who 
hold  universal  salvation,  hold  that  endless  punishment  is  unjust ; 
and  tliat  Christ  came  to  redeem  us  from  it.  Now  who  can  be- 
lieve this  ?  They  also  hold  that  sinners  deserve  only  a  tempora- 
ry punishment,  and  that  when  they  have  suffered  that,  they  are 
delivered  by  grace  and  mercy.  They  would  be  far  more  consist- 
ent if  they  should  renounce  revelation  entirely. 

2.  Hence  we  see  that  the  doctrine  of  future  endless  punish- 
ment is  not  dependent  on  a  few  texts  only  which  are  represented 
to  be  doubtful,  such  as  these  :  "  These  shall  go  away  into  ever- 
lasting punishment,"  etc.  But  it  is  implied  in  the  great  main 
fact  of  the  gospel,  the  death  of  Christ  to  atone  for  sin,  and  in  the 
very  idea  of  salvation  by  Christ ;  so  that  there  is  no  accounting 
for  this  acknowledged  fact,  and  this  conceded  doctrine,  on  the 
supposition  of  the  salvation  of  all  men.  For  my  part,  I  should 
be  apprehensive  of  no  danger  to  what  I  believe  to  be  the  truth, 
if  the  whole  controversy  were  rested  on  this  single  point,  "  That 
Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners"  by  the  pardon 
of  their  sins.  Let  this  one  proposition  be  explained  in  consis- 
tency with  the  salvation  of  all  men,  whether  on  the  supposition 
of  a  proper  atonement  made  by  Christ  or  not,  and  more  will  be 
done  to  establish  that  doctrine  than  I  have  as  yet  seen  done,  or 
than  I  believe  has  been  or  can  be  done. 

3.  The  consideration  of  the  tendency  of  the  doctrine  of  uni- 
versal salvation  to  infidelity  should  make  us  cautious  of  giving 
a  hasty  assent  to  it.  Indeed  we  ought  to  be  thus  cautious,  if  it 
did  not  tend  to  general  infidelity  ;  but  much  more,  since  it  is  of 
this  tendency.  Therefore  look  well  to  the  consequences  before 
you  take  the  leap.  One  error  is  always  connected  with  another, 
and  cannot  with  any  consistency  be  embraced  singly.  Look  to 
the  end  before  you  enter  on  the  path. 

4.  Be  not  induced  suddenly  to  renounce  your  former  faith, 
in  this,  or  in  any  other  important  article.  Doubtless  it  is  our 
duty  to  search  after  the  truth  carefully  and  candidly  and  embrace 
it  wherever  we  find  it ;  whether  consistent  or  not  with  our  former 
belief.   Yet  we  may  be  too  much  given  to  change.     I  have  no  ob- 

38* 


446  UNIVERSAL  SALVATION  INCONSISTENT,  ETC. 

jection  to  a  most  thorough  inquiry  into  this  subject  of  the  endless 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  and  am  persuaded  that  the  more  it  is 
discussed  the  more  clearly  it  will  appear  to  be  an  everlasting  truth. 
What  I  beseech  of  you  is,  that  you  will  be  indeed  thorough  in 
your  inquiry,  and  deliberate  in  your  determinations. 

5.  Since  there  is  at  least  a  possibility  that  the  punishment  of 
the  wicked  may  be  endless,  be  entreated  to  accept  the  only  offer- 
ed Savior.  Doing  this,  you  will  be  safe  on  every  supposition, 
whether  all  be  finally  saved  or  not.  As  therefore  what  I  now  re- 
commend can  be  attended  with  no  harm  and  may  be  attended 
with  infinite  advantage,  wisdom  and  prudence  enforce  the  exhor- 
tation. For  this  you  have  a  precious  opportunity  ;  for  "  now  is 
the  accepted  time  ;  now  is  the  day  of  salvation."  Now  mercy 
waits,  and  God  waits  to  be  gracious  ;  but  once  pass  the  limits  of 
life,  and  you  will  find  that  there  is  no  repentance  in  the  grave, 
and  no  salvation  from  hell. 


SERMON   XXIX. 


CHARITY  THE   VEIL  OF  SINS.* 

1  Peter  4:  8. — And  above  all  things  have  fervent  charity  anwng  yourselves; 
for  charity  shall  cover  the  multitude  of  sins. 

The  apostle  is  in  the  context  exhorting  to  the  practice  of  va- 
rious christian  duties  ;  especially  to  the  practice  of  those  of  the 
second  table  of  the  law,  viz.  those  which  either  respect  man- 
kind in  general,  or  our  christian  brethren  in  particular.  Such 
are  the  duties  of  hospitality,  and  what  is  commonly  called  charity 
which  he  mentions  immediately  after  our  text.  Immediately  be- 
fore the  text  he  mentions  sobriety,  watchfulness  and  prayer. 

Such  are  the  subjects  of  which  the  apostle  is  treating,  not  with 
modern  diffuseness,  but  in  that  concise  manner  which  is  every 
where  to  be  found  in  the  apostolic  writings.  Nor  was  it  at  all 
unsuitable,  when  he  was  recommending  such  duties,  to  introduce 
that  also  which  he  so  warmly  inculcates  in  the  words  of  our  text. 
"  Above  all  things,"  says  he,  "  have  fervent  charity  among  your- 
selves, for  charity  shall  cover  the  multitude  of  sins."  Here  I 
would,  1.  Inquire  into  the  true  sense  and  import  of  these  words, 
and,  2.  Mention  some  reasons  which  probably  the  apostle  had  in 
view  when  he  gave  this  exhortation,  and  which  ought  to  influence 
us  to  the  practice  of  this  duty. 

I.  /  am  to  inquire  into  the  proper  sense  and  import  of  these 
words. 

And  as  they  seem  always  to  have  been  accounted  somewhat 
obscure  and  difficult,  so  I  hope  I  shall  be  readily  excused  in  be- 
ing the  more  particular  in  this  part  of  my  discourse.  In  order  to 
explain  these  words  it  may  be  proper  for  us  to  inquire  what  we 
are  to  understand  by  "  charity,"  as  here  used  by  the  apostle  ;  to 
what  extent  is  it  to  be  exercised  ;  in  what  sense  we  are  exhorted  to 
have  charity  above  all  things  ;  and  how  it  may  be  said  to  cover 
a  multitude  of  sins.  If  these  things  be  duly  explained  I  think 
we  cannot  fail  of  the  true  sense  and  import  of  the  text. 

1.  We  are  to  inquire  ivhat  is  to  be  understood  by  that  chari- 

*  First  preached  in  1772. 


448  CHARITY  THE  VEIL   OF    SINS. 

ty  of  which  the  apostle  speaks.  This  word  and  words  of  the 
like  import,  are  differently  understood  as  they  occur  in  different 
connections.  You  doubtless  remember  that  the  apostle  treats 
largely  of  this  grace  in  1  Cor.  13th,  where  he  particularly  declares 
that  whatever  other  gifts  he  may  be  favored  with,  if  he  has  not 
tiiis  he  is  nothing.  "  Though  I  speak  with  the  tongues  of  men 
and  angels,  and  have  not  charity,  I  am  become  as  sounding  brass 
or  a  tinkling  cymbal.  And  though  I  have  the  gift  of  prophecy, 
and  understand  all  mysteries  and  all  knowledge  ;  and  though  I 
have  all  faith,  so  that  I  could  remove  mountains,  and  have  not 
charity,  I  am  nothing.  And  though  I  bestow  all  my  goods  to 
feed  the  poor,  and  though  I  give  n)y  body  to  be  burned,  and 
have  not  charity,  it  profiteth  me  nothing."  And  finally  in  the 
conclusion  of  his  argument  he  prefers  charity  even  before  faith 
and  hope,  two  very  eminent  christian  graces.  "  And  now  abideth 
faith,  hope,  charity,  these  three  ;  but  the  greatest  of  these  is 
charity."  In  all  this  chapter,  charity  has  been  generally  under- 
stood to  mean  a  principle  of  universal  love  both  toward  God  and 
his  creatures.  In  the  first  place  towards  God  as  supreme,  and 
then  towards  his  creatures  of  various  ranks  according  to  their  ex- 
cellence and  dignity. 

Two  different  senses  of  the  word  charity  seem  to  be  intimated, 
as  in  the  2-2d  chapter  of  Matthew,  where  we  are  commanded  to 
"  love  the  Lord  our  God  with  all  our  heart,"  etc.  and  "  our 
neighbor  as  ourselves."  Perhaps  it  will  be  needless  for  me  to 
observe,  that  the  word  here  translated,  "thou  shalt  love,"  is  im- 
mediately derived  from  that  in  the  forementioned  passages  trans- 
lated charity,  and  carries  the  very  same  sense  and  import.  In 
this  place  therefore  charity  means,  first,  a  supreme  love  to  God, 
and  secondly,  a  subordinate  love  to  men,  or  to  mankind  in  gene- 
ral. There  is  yet  a  different  sense  of  this  word.  It  is  found  in 
Christ's  last  discourse  to  his  disciples  before  his  crucifixion, 
wherein  he  delivers  his  new  commandment  to  them.  "A  new 
commandment,"  says  he,  "  I  give  unto  you,  that  ye  love  one 
another ;  as  I  have  loved  you,  that  ye  also  love  one  another." 
Here  it  is  plain,  that  charity  is  confined  to  Christ's  disciples,  those 
whom  he  had  loved  and  made  the  objects  of  his  peculiar  compla- 
cency. And  this  love  or  charity  is  necessarily  different  in  seve- 
ral respects  from  any  love  that  we  are  commanded  to  exercise  to- 
wards any  other  person.  Will  any  one  pretend  that  we  are  com- 
manded to  exercise  the  same  love  towards  those  who  are  stran- 
gers and  aliens  from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  enemies  to 
God  by  wicked  works,  as  we  are  towards  the  true  children  of 
God,  who  are  make  partakers  of  the  divine  nature ;  as  towards 


CHARITY  THE   VEIL   OF   SINS.  449 

the  true  disciples  of  Christ,  who  are  made  like  him,  and  of  his 
fulness  have  received,  and  grace  for  grace  ;  as  towards  those 
wlio  are  made  the  subjects  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  are  lead  and 
taught  by  him  ?  No,  it  is  manifest  that  those  who  stand  in  the 
relation  of  children  to  God,  are  entitled  to  a  peculiar  regard  from 
the  relation  which  they  bear  to  him  ;  that  those  who  are  so  closely 
joined  to  Christ  as  to  become  members  of  his  flesh  and  of  his 
bones,  yea  to  be  one  spirit  with  him,  are  entitled  to  a  peculiar 
love  on  these  very  accounts ;  that  those  who  are  sanctified  by 
the  Holy  Spirit  of  God,  are  entitled  to  a  peculiar  respect  and  af- 
fection, because  of  the  truth  which  dwells  in  them.  Now  this 
peculiar  love,  respect,  complacency,  or  whatever  name  we  give 
it,  wiiich  is  to  be  exercised  towards  Christ  and  towards  his  disci- 
ples, and  which  lie  enjoined  in  his  new  commandment,  is  I  think 
that  very  charity  to  which  the  apostle  exhorts  in  our  text.  And 
this  is  manifest,  if  anything  need  be  said  to  make  it  manifest, 
from  the  consideration  of  the  persons  to  whom  he  wrote  this 
epistle,  compared  with  the  very  words  of  the  text.  To  whom  he 
wrote  this  epistle  may  be  seen  in  chapter  1:  1,2.  From  them  it 
appears  that  they  were  "  the  elect  of  God  ;"  they  were  sanctified 
by  the  Holy  Spirit ;  they  were  sprinkled  with  the  blood  of  Christ. 
And  surely  these  were  no  other  than  the  disciples  of  Christ.  Let 
us  now  compare  the  light  which  we  obtain  from  this  considera- 
tion, with  the  words  of  the  text.  In  the  text  the  apostle  exhorts 
those  to  whom  he  wrote,  who  were  the  true  disciples  of  Christ, 
to  have  fervent  charity,  towards  whom  ?  Towards  all  men  ;  to- 
wards the  bad  as  well  as  the  good  ;  towards  sinners  as  well  as 
saints  ?  No,  but  towards  one  another.  By  which  it  is  manifest 
that  charity  in  the  text  means  that  peculiar  love  between  the 
saints  which  is  enjoined  in  Christ's  new  commandment. 

2.  The  next  thing  proposed  was  to  inquire  into  the  extent  of 
the  duty  enjoined  in  the  text.  This  in  some  measure  appears 
from  what  has  been  already  said,  but  it  may  not  be  amiss  to  en- 
large a  little  more  upon  it.  It  appears  then  that  the  apostle  does 
not  exhort  to  exercise,  or  put  on  charity  towards  all  men.  It  is 
indeed  our  undoubted  duty  to  love  all  mankind,  both  good  and 
bad,  and  even  our  worst  enemies.  But  wc  are  not  to  love  them 
all  alike,  nor  with  the  same  kind  of  love.  We  ouglit  to  love  all 
with  a  love  of  benevolence  and  good  will,  wishing  well  to  them, 
and  actually  doing  good  to  them  as  we  have  opportunity.  Yet 
notwithstanding  this  we  are  more  especially  bound  to  love  and 
do  good  to  the  household  of  faith  ;  whom  we  are  bound  to  love 
not  only  with  benevolence,  but  with  delight  and  complacency. 
And  this  love  of  delight  and  complacency  towards  the  household 


450  CHARITY  THE   VEIL   OF   SINS. 

of  faith,  is  the  very  same  as  that  charity  spoken  of  in  the  text ; 
and  this  it  is  not  our  duty  to  have  towards  any  but  those  who 
are,  or  at  least  appear  to  be,  the  true  children  of  God  and  the 
true  disciples  of  Christ. 

I  shall  not  now  undertake  particularly  to  lay  before  you  the 
evidences  at  large  whereby  we  may  judge  others  to  be  the  true 
disciples  of  Christ.  In  general  the  scriptures  teach  us  to  know 
them  by  their  fruits.  And  the  general  fruits  into  which  all  par- 
ticular ones  may  be  resolved  are  these  two,  a  profession  of  the 
truth,  and  a  life  and  conduct  corresponding  thereto.  Unless 
these  two  things  are  found  in  a  man,  we  cannot  rationally  esteem 
him  a  true  christian,  nor  have  christian  charity  towards  him.  Let 
a  man  therefore  make  ever  so  full,  clear,  particular  and  under- 
standing a  profession  of  the  truth,  yet  if  his  temper  of  mind  and 
conduct  of  life  be  apparently  different  therefrom,  we  have  no 
right  to  embrace  him  in  the  arms  of  our  charity.  Nor  any  more 
on  the  other  hand  though  his  visible  conduct  be  ever  so  correct 
and  according  to  christian  rules,  if  still  he  makes  not  a  profession 
of  the  truth.  For  it  is  the  truth  which  is  to  make  us  free.  Nor 
is  there  any  absurdity  in  supposing  that  a  man  may  be  very  moral 
in  his  outward  conduct,  and  yet  in  his  heart  be  an  enemy  to  the 
cross  of  Christ. 

3.  In  what  sense  we  are  exhorted  to  have  fervent  charity 
among  ourselves  above  all  things.  And  though  I  seldom  deliver 
criticisms  on  the  original  text  from  the  pulpit,  yet  doubtless  some- 
times it  is  allowable,  and  such  a  time  I  think  the  present.  The 
original  is  tiqo  Ttdfioiv  de  i?]v  fig  iuviovg  uyunrjv  ixtevrj  iyovng, 
the  literal  translation  of  which  is  this :  "  but  having  fervent  char- 
ity towards  yourselves  above  all,"  that  is,  before  all  men,  in  the 
view  of  the  world.  This,  I  think,  is  the  most  natural  and  simple 
construction  of  this  passage.  Nor  do  I  know  of  any  reason  which 
determined  our  translators  to  a  different  construction,  unless  it 
was  that  they  had  before  given  a  similar  construction  of  a  passage 
which  I  suppose  they  esteemed  of  the  same  import  with  this  now 
under  consideration.  The  passage  is  Gal.  3:  14, '"Above  all 
things  put  on  charity."  In  the  original,  inl  num  df  roviuig^  which 
I  cannot  but  think  ought  to  have  been  rendered,  "  ftesirfes  all 
these  things,"  etc.  As  I  cannot  but  think,  therefore,  that  our 
translators  have  mistaken  the  true  construction  in  one  case,  so 
no  wonder  they  did  in  the  other.  The  true  rendering  of  the 
text  therefore  I  suppose  to  be  this:  "And  have  fervent  charity 
towards  one  another  before,  or  in  the  view  of  all  men  ;  for  chari- 
ty covereth  a  multitude  of  sins."  I  say  a  multitude  of  sins,  and 
not  the  multitude,  as  in  our  translation ;  for  in  the  original  the 
article  is  wanting. 


CHARITY  THE  VEIL  OF  SINS.  451 

4.  In  what  sense  charity  is  said  to  cover  a  multitude  of  sins. 
You  donbtless  know  that  the  sense  which  has  been  frequently 
put  upon  these  words  is  this  :  that  if  we  exercise  charity  towards 
our  fellow  creatures,  and  are  ready  to  administer  to  the  supply 
of  their  wants,  this  virtue  will  in  return  procure  for  us  the  favor 
of  God,  and  the  forgiveness  of  at  least  many,  if  not  all  our  sins. 
This  sense  of  the  words  is  by  some  warmly  espoused  and  defend- 
ed. But  the  chief  reason  which  they  have  to  urge  in  behalf  of 
this  interpretation  is,  tiiat  the  apostle  does  so  strictly  and  solemn- 
ly enjoin  the  exercise  of  charity,  in  that  he  says,  "  Above  all  things 
have  fervent  charity."  Can  we  suppose,  say  they,  that  the  apos- 
tle would  thus  prefer  charity  and  recommend  it  above  all  other 
graces,  if  it  were  not  of  sufficient  value  in  the  sight  of  God  to 
procure  the  pardon  of  our  sins?  Whereas  you  see  we  have 
evaded  the  whole  force  of  this  argument,  by  what  we  have  before 
said  concerning  the  true  construction  of  the  original  text.  In- 
deed the  apostle  does  in  the  13th  chap,  of  the  1  Cor.  prefer  chari- 
ty before  faith,  and  hope,  and  all  other  graces.  But  we  must 
remember,  as  before  said,  that  charity  there  and  here  do  not 
mean  the  same  thing.  There  it  means  the  general  principle  of  all 
grace  in  the  heart ;  but  here  only  the  particular  exercise  of  broth- 
erly love.  And  not  only  so,  but  if  charity  did  include  all 
christian  graces,  still  it  would  be  utterly  insufficient  to  cover  our 
sins  in  the  sense  now  in  question.  For  it  is  not  our  virtue  and 
goodness  wdiich  covers  our  sins,  but  the  infinitely  meritorious 
righteousness  of  Christ  the  Son  of  God. 

As  it  appears  therefore  that  this,  which  has  been  mentioned, 
cannot  be  the  true  sense  of  the  apostle,  I  shall  now  mention  some 
senses  wherein  charity  may  be  said  to  cover  sins  consistently 
with  other  passages  of  scripture. 

(1)  Charity  covers  sins,  as  it  influences  those  who  are  the  sub- 
jects of  it,  to  overlook  and  forgive  the  sins  of  others.  So  the 
apostle  Paul  tells  us  that  charity  believeth  all  things,  and  hopeth 
all  things,  that  is,  is  disposed  always  to  believe  and  hope  the  best 
of  all  men,  and  consequently  to  cast  a  mantle  of  love  over  the 
many  failings  and  imperfections  of  others.  If  this  be  the  sense 
of  the  apostle,  the  words  noo  navrwv  will  not  be  emphatical,  and 
the  whole  verse  will  run  thus:  "Before  all  men  have  charity 
towards  one  another.  This  you  will  find  very  beneficial  to  you 
in  your  christian  fellowship,  because  it  will  influence  you  to  for- 
give a  multitude  of  sins  and  imperfections  in  one  another  and 
in  all." 

(2)  Charity  may  be  said  to  cover  sins,  as  it  has  a  powerful  in- 
fluence on  others  to  give  them  a  good  opinion  of  us,  and  to  cause 


452  CHARITY  THE  VEIL  OF  SINS. 

them  to  overlook  many  of  our  short  comings.  It  naturally  would 
have  had  this  eflfect  on  the  heathen  among  whom  the  christians, 
to  whom  Peter  wrote,  lived.  Yea,  it  actually  had  this  effect.  It 
was  universally  taken  notice  of  among  the  heathen,  how  firmly 
the  primitive  christians  were  united  in  brotherly  love  ;  and  this 
appears  to  have  been  one  means  in  the  hands  of  God,  for  bring- 
ing about  the  conversion  of  many.  If  this  be  the  sense,  the  sen- 
timent of  the  whole  verse  would  be,  "  Before  all  men  have  fervent 
charity  towards  one  another ;  for  this  will  make  men  think  favor- 
ably of  yomselves,  and  highly  of  your  religion."  This  suggests, 

(3)  Another  sense  in  which  charity  may  be  said  to  cover  a 
multitude  of  sins  ;  as  it  is  a  powerful  means  of  conviction  to 
others  of  the  truth  of  religion,  and  so  by  the  divine  blessing  a 
means  of  their  conversion  from  sin  to  holiness,  and  consequently 
of  preventing  all  that  sin  into  which  otherwise  they  would  fall. 
In  tiiis  case  it  may  be  said  tliat  charity  covers  sins  as  it  prevents 
them.  And  it  is  worthy  of  particular  observation,  that  he  that 
converteth  another,  is  said,  in  this  sense,  to  cover  his  sins.  James 
5:  19,20,  "Brethren,"  says  the  apostle,  "if  any  of  you  do  err 
from  the  truth,  and  one  convert  him,  let  him  know  that  he  which 
converteth  the  sinner  from  the  error  of  his  way  shall  save  a  soul 
from  death,  and  shall  hide  a  multitude  of  sins  ;"  that  is,  he  shall 
prevent  a  multitude  of  sins  which  otherwise  he  would  fall  into, 
and  also  be  the  means  of  his  past  sins  being  forgiven  and  blotted 
out  through  Christ.  If  the  apostle  intended  that  we  should  take 
him  in  this  last  sense,  then  the  whole  verse  v/ill  be  of  this  import : 
"  Have  fervent  charity  towards  one  another  before  all  men,  be- 
cause your  charity  will  be  a  powerful  means  of  conviction  of 
others,  and  by  the  divine  blessing  may  be  effectual  to  their  con- 
version, and  so  a  means  both  of  procuring  the  pardon  of  their  past 
sins,  and  of  preventing  many  which  otherwise  they  would  com- 
mit in  the  future." 

Thus  I  have  endeavored  to  clear  these  words  of  the  false  sense 
which  by  some  has  been  affixed  to  them,  and  to  point  out  seve- 
ral senses  in  which  they  may  be  understood  in  consistency  with 
other  passages  of  scripture.  Having  thus  in  some  manner  gone 
through  what  was  proposed  under  our  first  head,  I  proceed, 

II.  To  mention  some  I'easons  ivhich  probably  the  apostle  had 
in  view  in  giving  this  exhortation,  and  which  ought  to  influ- 
ence us  to  the  practice  of  this  charity. 

1.  It  tends  to  mutual  j^eace  and,  comfort.  When  this  charity 
is  wanting  among  christians,  they  lose  all  the  benefit  and  comfort 
of  christian  fellowship.  They  can  have  no  mutual  confidence, 
no  free  conversation  on  spiritual  things,  no  brotherly  counsels, 


CHARITY  THE  VEIL  OF   SINS.  453 

admonitions  or  exhortations  ;  none  of  the  duties  of  christians  to- 
wards each  other  can  be  fully  put  into  operation.  The  conse- 
quence is  that  they  lose  all  the  benefit  of  mutual  sympathy  and 
christian  intercourse,  and  of  the  watch  and  care  of  each  other. 
And  not  only  so  but  mutual  jealousies  soon  begin  to  prevail,  and 
evil  surmisings  with  regard  to  each  other ;  and  from  evil  sur- 
misings  soon  springs  a  firm  belief  corresponding  to  these  surmis- 
ings;  and  from  this  belief  comes  evil  speaking;  and  from  evil 
speaking,  wrath  and  violent  contentions.  And  then  as  the  apos- 
tle James  informs  us  ''  where  envying  and  strife  are,  there  is  con- 
fusion and  every  evil  work."  By  these  means  therefore  christians 
not  only  often  lose  the  comforts  of  religion,  but  frequently  fall 
into  temptation  and  sin,  and  wound  the  cause  of  Christ  and  their 
own  souls.  This  therefore  is  a  sufficient  reason  why  we  should 
exercise  not  only  charity  in  general  towards  each  other,  but  also 
why  we  should  have  it  in  a  fervent  degree  ;  for  in  proportion  as 
its  degree  is  small,  in  the  same  proportion  shall  we  fail  of  these 
beneficial  consequences  and  incur  the  contrary  evils. 

2.  It  is  required  by  the  honor  of  Christ  and  his  religion  which 
we  profess.  These  are  greatly  concerned  in  this  affair,  as  is  evi- 
dent from  what  I  have  already  said  on  this  subject.  But  I  would 
enlarge  a  little  more  on  this  head  before  I  leave  it.  If  Christian- 
ity be  a  reality,  and  the  doctrine  thereof  be  true,  and  if  it  teaches 
that  christians  are  all  children  of  one  common  father,  redeemed 
by  one  blood,  members  of  the  same  body,  and  heirs  of  the  same 
blessings  and  kingdom,  what  else  could  be  expected  of  them  than 
that  they  should  have  fervent  charity  towards  one  another  ?  Even 
the  heathen  standing  by  and  beholding  only  as  spectators  may 
well  expect  to  find  this  the  fact ;  and  so  may  all  these  who  are 
without.  And  if  they  find  it  otherwise  ;  if  instead  of  such  fer- 
vent charity,  they  find  that  professors  of  Christianity  care  little 
about  each  other,  and  have  no  more  love  or  complacency  in  each 
other  than  they  have  in  others  who  are  without ;  if  they  find 
among  them  mutual  jealousies,  animosities,  wrath  and  contention 
what  must  they  conclude  ?  It  will  doubtless  be  natural  for  them 
to  say,  surely  these  men  are  not  the  men  they  pretend  to  be ; 
surely  there  is  nothing  in  the  doctrines  they  profess  ;  viz.  that 
they  are  all  heirs  of  the  same  kingdom,  children  of  the  same 
father,  having  the  same  spirit  dwelling  in  and  actuating  them  all. 
For  if  so  it  would  be  impossible  but  that  this  same  spirit  should 
unite,  close  in  with,  and  embrace  itself  in  the  arms  of  charity. 
This  is  doubtless  a  just  inference  ;  and  so  far  as  this  appears  to 
be  fact,  so  far  Christianity  appears  a  reality  in  the  view  of  the 
world,  and  so  far  they  have  the  means  of  conviction  lying  before 

Vol.  II.  39 


454  CHARITS^  THE  VEIL  OF   SINS. 

them.  But  so  far  as  the  fact  is  otherwise,  so  far  it  appears  in  a 
dishonorable  hght,  as  a  mere  pretence  or  system  of  hypocrisy. 
Thus  the  honor  of  rehgion  and  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  founder  of 
the  gospel,  is  immediately  affected  by  our  want  of  charity.  No 
wonder  then  that  the  apostle  so  warmly  enjoins  the  practice  of 
it  in  the  text. 

3.  Another  reason  for  the  same  thing  is  the  mutual  edification 
of  christians  among  themselves.  How  can  they  either  grow  in 
grace  themselves  or  edify  one  another,  if  they  fail  in  this  duty? 
If  they  fail  in  this  charity,  they  fail  in  what  is  everywhere  repre- 
sented as  a  most  important  part  of  the  christian  character,  and 
an  exercise  which  immediately  results  from  the  christian  spirit. 
The  christian  spirit  is  a  spirit  of  love  or  charity.  Hence  love  is 
said  to  be  greater  than  either  faith  or  hope.  And  the  first  and 
great  commandment  of  the  law  is,  that  we  "  love  the  Lord  our 
God  with  all  our  heart,"  and  then  the  second  which  is  like  unto 
it  is,  that  "we  love  our  neighbor  as  ourselves."  And  because  a 
spirit  of  love  is  so  great  and  essential  a  part  of  the  christian  char- 
acter, therefore  the  apostle  tells  us  though  a  man  should  speak 
with  the  tongues  of  men  and  angels,  and  have  not  charity,  he  is 
become  as  sounding  brass,  or  a  tinkling  cymbal.  And  though  he 
have  the  gift  of  prophecy,  and  understand  all  mysteries,  and  all 
knowledge  ;  and  though  he  have  all  faith,  so  that  he  can  remove 
mountains,  and  yet  be  destitute  of  a  principle  of  love,  he  is  no- 
thing. And  finally  though  he  should  bestow  all  his  goods  to  feed 
the  poor,  and  give  his  body  to  be  burned,  if  yet  he  be  destitute 
of  a  spirit  of  love,  it  shall  profit  him  nothing.  If  therefore  this 
spirit  of  love  bears  this  place  in  the  christian  character,  how  can 
it  be  expected  that  christians  destitute  of  its  exercise  towards  one 
another,  should  either  advance  themselves  in  the  divine  life,  or 
profit  one  another  ? 

4.  I  might  also  mention  as  another  reason  for  the  same  thing, 
the  conviction  and  conversion  of  others.  But  as  I  have  already 
touched  upon  this,  I  shall  say  nothing  further  of  it  at  present. 
And  as  the  reasons  already  given  may  be  sufficient  to  show  the 
reasonableness  and  obligation  of  this  duty,  I  would  close  with 
some  improvement  of  the  subject. 

If  it  is  such  an  important  part  of  christian  duty  to  live  in  the 
exercise  of  charity  towards  one  another  as  fellow  christians,  then 
it  is  also  our  duty  to  live  in  the  exercise  and  discharge  of  those 
things  which  are  the  proper  fruits  and  effects  of  charity.  These 
are  as  much  our  duty  as  charity  itself.  Let  us  therefore  for  a 
moment  consider  what  are  the  genuine  fruits  of  this  amiable 
christian  virtue.     I  mean  especially  on  the  part  of  christians  to- 


CAARITY  THE  VEIL  OF   SINS.  455 

wards  one  another.  For  it  is  of  tiiis  exercise  of  charity  that  the 
apostle  is  speaking  in  the  text  as  we  before  showed.  One  of 
these  fruits  is, 

1 .  Tliat  we  watch  over  one  another  for  our  mutual  good. 
The  apostle  tells  the  christians  to  whom  he  wrote,  "  I  am  jealous 
over  you  with  a  holy  jealousy."  And  doubtless  herein  he  exer- 
cised this  charity  which  is  so  warmly  recommended  in  the  text. 
He  dearly  loved  his  fellow  ciiristians  ;  and  knowing  at  the  same 
time  the  infirmity  of  the  flesh,  to  which  he  was  aware  they  were 
in  some  degree  subject,  he  was  jealous  over  them.  And  herein 
it  becomes  us  to  imitate  him,  and  to  be  jealous  over  one  another, 
and  to  watch  over  one  another.  Indeed  it  becomes  us  in  the  first 
place  to  be  jealous  over  ourselves  and  to  watch  ourselves,  as  to 
the  exercises  and  operations,  the  biases  and  inclinations  of  our  own 
hearts,  and  the  fruit  and  practice  which  most  naturally  flow  from 
them.  But  while  we  watch  over  ourselves,  we  are  by  no  means 
to  neglect  our  christian  brethren.  There  are  duties  incumbent  up- 
on us  towards  them,  which  are  by  no  means  to  be  omitted.  We 
are  not  to  seek  merely  our  own  good  ;  but  every  one  the  good  of 
his  brethren.  And  of  all  the  various  duties  which  christian  breth- 
ren owe  to  another,  that  of  a  mutual  watch  and  care  is  by  no  means 
the  least  important.  And  this  is  no  more  than  the  proper  fruit  and 
effect  of  charity.  If  we  love  our  brethren  as  we  ought  to  do,  we 
shall  naturally  be  careful  and  watchful  of  their  conduct,  lest  they 
wound  and  dishonor  themselves  as  christians,  and  the  solemn 
profession  which  they  have  made.  If  therefore  we  are  bound  to 
the  exercise  of  charity  itself,  we  are  also  bound  to  the  discharge 
of  this  its  proper  fruit. 

2.  Another  fruit  of  charity  is  that  we  counsel  and  exhort  one 
another  on  all  proper  occasions.  That  charity  does  dictate  this, 
is  I  think  manifest.  For  if  we  love  our  brethren  as  we  ought, 
how  can  we  avoid  giving  them  our  best  counsel  and  advice,  as 
occasion  and  opportunity  shall  present?  Certainly  to  do  other- 
wise would  be  an  evidence,  not  of  charity  but  of  the  want  of  it. 
And  the  apostle  also  expressly  inculcates  this  duty  in  Heb.  3: 
13,  "  Exhort  one  another  daily  while  it  is  called  to-day,  lest  any 
of  you  be  hardened  through  the  deceitfulness  of  sin."  Here  the 
apostle  both  gives  the  exhortation,  and  adds  the  reason  ;  viz.  the 
danger  there  was  lest  they  should  be  hardened  through  the  de- 
ceitfulness of  sin. 

3.  Another  fruit  of  the  same  principle  is  that  we  warn,  cor- 
rect and  admonish  one  another,  when  there  is  need.  This  ari- 
ses from  the  same  principle  of  love,  which  will  lead  us  to  this, 
as  to  either  of  the  former  fruits.     For  if  we  dearly  love  our  chris- 


456  CHARITY  THE  VEIL  OF   SINS. 

tian  brethren  we  shall  be  willing  to  take  any  steps,  or  use  any 
means  with  them  which  shall  be  for  their  good.  And  that  ad- 
monition, correction  and  christian  discipline  are  necessary  for  the 
good  of  christians,  at  some  times,  I  believe  none  will  deny.  We 
are  therefore  absolutely  bound  by  the  law  of  brotherly  love  to 
admonish,  correct,  and  use  all  the  steps  of  christian  discipline 
with  one  another  as  there  shall  be  occasion.  In  how  difterent  a 
light  therefore  does  the  affair  of  christian  discipline  appear  when 
viewed  according  to  truth  from  that  in  which  it  is  viewed  by 
many.  Many  seem  to  conceive  of  it  as  a  malicious  thing  for 
one  christian  brother  to  enter  upon  a  process  of  discipline  with 
respect  to  another.  Whereas  the  truth  is,  it  is  the  very  dictate 
of  love  itself;  and  the  more  we  love  one  another,  the  more  ready 
shall  we  be  to  admonish  and  discipline  one  another,  on  all  pro- 
per occasions.  And  when  this  is  entirely  neglected  among  breth- 
ren, it  is  a  strong  argument  that  this  grace  is  at  a  very  low  ebb. 
Yea,  it  is  an  argument,  at  least  in  these  degenerate  days  of  the 
church,  that  christians  have  not  a  proper  sense  either  of  the  obli- 
gations of  this  law  of  Christ  which  so  expressly  enjoins  discipline, 
or  of  the  honor  of  Christ  and  his  cause,  whicli  are  so  immediate- 
ly concerned  in  this  affair.  And  as  we  are  bound  to  do  these 
things,  so  wherein  we  have  fallen  short  of  them,  either  as  indi- 
viduals in  a  church,  or  as  a  church,  an  ecclesiastical  body,  we 
are  bound  to  reflect  upon  our  conduct,  to  repent  of  what  is  past, 
and  for  the  future  to  reform.  And  let  us  remember  that  there 
is,  and  can  be  no  true  repentance  without  reformation. 

4.  I  shall  mention  but  one  more  fruit  of  christian  charity  or 
brotherly  love  ;  and  that  is,  that  it  ivill  lead  us  to  distribute  to  our 
brethren  in  Christ  according  to  their  necessity  and  our  ability. 
We  are  to  do  good  in  this  way  to  all  men,  but  are  under  more 
particular  obligations  to  those  who  are  of  the  household  of  faith. 
This  duty  is  much  inculcated  in  the  scriptures.  Thus  the  apos- 
tle directs  Timothy  to  "  charge  them  that  are  rich  to  do  good,  to 
be  rich  in  good  works,  ready  to  distribute,  willing  to  communi- 
cate ;"  and  again  in  writing  to  the  Hebrews,  he  says,  "  God  is 
not  unrighteous  to  forget  your  work  and  labor  of  love  which  ye 
have  showed  toward  his  name,  in  that  ye  have  ministered  to  the 
saints  and  do  minister."  And  innumerable  other  passages  there 
are  to  the  same  purpose.  And  they  are  enforced  also  with  very 
powerful  motives;  particularly  in  1  Tim  6:  18,  upon  which  the 
apostle  adds  in  verse  19,  "  Laying  up  in  store  for  themselves  a 
good  foundation  against  the  time  to  come,  that  they  may  lay  hold 
on  eternal  life." 

vF  TT  TT  TT  ^  -jt*  ^  Tff  W 


ARTICLES  FROM  THE  THEOLOGICAL  MAGAZINE, 


39* 


ARTICLES,    ETC 


MERIT  OF  VIRTUE  AND  DEMERIT  OF  SIN. 

It  has  been  supposed  by  some,  that  if  the  demerit  of  sin  be  in- 
finite, the  merit  of  the  creature's  virtue  must  also,  by  a  parity  of 
reason,  be  infinite.  A  httle  attention,  however,  to  the  rule  by 
which,  in  general,  we  are  to  estimate  the  merit  and  demerit  of 
actions,  may  convince  us  that  this  is  not  the  case  :  and  this  must 
be  the  good  or  the  evil  they  produce  or  effect.  If  this  be  the  rule 
by  which  we  are  to  estimate  moral  actions,  the  supposition  that 
the  merit  of  the  creature's  virtue  is  infinite,  because  the  demerit 
of  his  sin  is  said  to  be  so,  will  imply,  that  the  creature  is  capable 
of  doing  as  much  good  as  hurt.  For,  if  a  creature  be  capable  of 
doing  more  hurt  than  good,  it  is  manifest  that  the  demerit  of  his 
wickedness  may  exceed  the  merit  of  his  virtue  ;  and  that  in  pro- 
portion to  the  excess  of  the  mischief.  It  is  often  said,  and  that 
justly,  that  a  man  may  do  more  hurt  in  an  hour,  than  he  can  re- 
pair in  an  age.  The  demerit  of  his  wickedness  must  then  pro- 
portionably  exceed  the  merit  of  his  virtue.  A  single  person  may 
destroy  the  peace,  and  excite  the  fears  and  terror  of  a  whole 
neighborhood  or  society  ;  and  in  that  way,  cause  a  degree  of 
misery  and  distress  very  far  exceeding  the  happiness  which  will 
naturally  arise  from  any  virtuous  action  whatever  which  he  is  ca- 
pable of  performing. 

If  a  man  committed  robbery  or  murder,  and  there  were  no  power 
or  authority  sufficient  to  restrain  or  punish  the  culprit,  the  whole 
community  would  immediately  suffer,  and  every  one  feel  both 
property  and  life  to  be  insecure.  Thus,  one  sinner  would  de- 
stroy much  good.  So,  also,  should  any  one  rise  up  in  rebellion 
against  the  divine  government,  and  there  were  no  one  at  the  head 
of  the  system,  either  sufficiently  powerful,  or  inclined,  to  restrain 
wickedness,  and  punish  the  criminal  ;  every  creature  would,  of 
course,  feel  insecure  under  the  government  of  God  ;  and  confi- 
dence could  be  no  longer  placed  in  him.  The  happiness  of  the 
whole  system  would,  consequently,  be  at  an  eternal  end.  This 
would  be  the  natural  fruit  and  consequence  of  rebellion  against 
God,  did  he  not  possess  both  power  and  will  abundantly  sufficient 


460  MERIT  OF  VIRTUE 

to  restrain  wickedness,  and  to  secure  the  system  against  the  other- 
wise fatal  effects  of  it. 

But  if  sin,  through  the  power  and  interposition  of  God,  fail 
of  producing  these  doleful  effects,  is  it  therefore  the  less  sinful? 
If  it  be  ;  then,  should  God,  in  infinite  wisdom  and  goodness,  over- 
rule all  the  moral  evil  which  takes  place,  to  the  greater  good  and 
happiness  of  the  system,  there  would  be  no  sinfulness  or  crimi- 
nality at  all  in  it.  Because  the  wisdom  of  government  is  such  as 
to  overrule  a  theft,  a  murder,  or  a  rebellion,  to  the  greater  secu- 
rity and  happiness  of  the  community  at  large,  would  it  thence 
follow,  that  neither  theft,  murder,  nor  rebellion,  have  any  crimi- 
nality in  them?  No  more  is  the  evil  of  sin  lessened  by  the  con- 
sideration of  its  otherwise  fatal  effects  being  prevented  by  the 
power  and  wisdom  of  God. 

The  happiness  of  multitudes  would  be  endangered  and  de- 
stroyed by  one  sinner,  were  it  not  for  the  interposition  of  some 
foreign  and  superior  power.  The  demerit  of  sin  must,  therefore, 
be  supposed  to  be  in  proportion  to  the  natural  evil  which,  in  a 
common  course  of  things,  would  be  its  certain  and  necessary  ef- 
fects, without  the  interposition  of  any  foreign  extrinsic  power. 

If  this  be  the  rule  by  which  we  are  to  estimate  the  demerit  of 
sin,  it  would  of  course  seem  that  the  merit  of  virtue  ought  to  be 
estimated  by  the  natural  good — the  felicity  which,  in  a  common 
course  of  things,  it  will  effect,  without  any  interruption  from 
any  extrinsic  or  foreign  influence.  According  to  this  rule  of 
estimating  the  demerit  of  sin,  and  the  merit  of  the  creature'' s 
virtue,  the  disproportion  will  appear  to  be  unspeakably  great. 
One  sinner  will  spread  misery  far  and  wide  ;  and  unless  the  conse- 
quences be  prevented  by  some  foreign  power,  the  natural  evil  of 
his  wickedness  will  know  neither  bound  nor  end. 

On  the  other  hand,  how  inadequate  are  the  powers  and  virtue 
of  a  creature  to  a  proportionable  diffusion  of  happiness,  even 
though  they  meet  with  no  interruption  from  any  foreign  influence 
whatever  ? 

Should  it  be  said,  that,  as  others  will  naturally  experience  the 
unhappy  consequences  of  the  rebellion  of  a  sinner;  so,  others 
will  also  naturally  enjoy  the  happy  fruits  of  the  obedience  and 
virtue  of  the  righteous — it  being  the  nature  of  benevolent  affec- 
tion to  rejoice  in  all  the  good  that  is  done,  by  whomsoever  it  be 
performed  ;  it  may  be  replied,  that  without  the  interposition  of 
God,  the  virtuous  would  be  made  miserable  by  the  conduct  of 
the  wicked  ;  and  that,  without  any  vice  of  their  own.  But  how 
small  a  degree  of  good  is  any  virtuous  creature  capable  of  doing 
to  others,  without  the  exercise  of  virtuous  affection  in  them  also, 


AND  DEMERIT  OF   SIN.  461 

to  make  them  to  partake  in  it  ?  It  is  true,  that  the  virtuous  do, 
in  fact,  partake  in  all  the  good  they  know  to  be  done,  whether  it 
be  done  immediately  to  themselves,  or  to  others.  But  it  is  only 
the  exercise  of  their  benevolent  affection  that  gives  them  the  en- 
joyment of  the  good  which  is  done  to  others. 

It  is  not  the  vice  of  the  obedient  that  they  suffer  by  the  ivick- 
edness  of  others  ;  for  a  robbery,  or  a  murder,  will  alarm  the  fears 
of  the  innocent,  and  create  pain  in  them.  But  it  is  the  virtue  of 
the  righteous  that  gives  them  to  enjoy  the  good  which  is  done  to 
others.  Tlie  evil  of  sin  is  to  be  estimated  by  the  miseries  it  pro- 
duceth  without  the  concurrence  of  the  wickedness  of  others. 
By  the  same  rule  the  worth  of  the  creature's  virtue  is  to  be  esti- 
mated by  the  good  which,  in  a  natural  course  of  things,  it  effect- 
eth,  without  the  concurrent  aids  of  the  goodness  of  others. 

The  pain,  therefore,  to  which  the  innocent  are  subjected  by 
the  wickedness  of  others,  necessarily  comes  into  consideration  in 
estimating  the  demerit  of  transgression.  But  the  happiness  oc- 
casioned in  the  innocent,  by  the  good  deeds  done  to  others,  ari- 
ses from  the  exercise  of  their  own  virtuous  affection.  This  hap- 
piness is,  therefore,  not  to  come  into  consideration,  in  estimating 
the  ivorth  of  the  good  deeds  done. 

The  virtue  of  others  in  enjoying  a  good  deed  done  by  me,  not 
immediately  to  themselves,  is  not  to  be  set  to  the  score  of  my 
merit  in  doing  it.  Nor  doth  the  innocence  of  others,  who  suffer 
by  my  wickedness,  at  all  extenuate  my  crime  in  committing  it. 

If,  therefore,  sin  have  infinite  demerit,  it  will,  by  no  just  rule 
of  reasoning,  from  thence  follow,  that  the  merit  of  the  creature^ s 
virtue  is  also  infinite. 


[Some  strictures  ivere  made  hy  an  able  anonymous  ivriter  upon  the  above  aiii- 
cle.  The  nature  of  his  objections  will  be  seen  from  the  following  reply  of  Dr. 
Edwards.] 

Mr.  Editor, — It  is  a  matter  of  some  importance,  that  the  rule 
by  which  we  are  to  estimate  the  mej'it  of  virtue,  and  the  demerit 
of  vice,  should  be  understood.  This  rule,  it  is  supposed  by  a 
writer  in  the  third  number  of  your  Magazine,  page  222,  was  not 
properly  stated  and  defined  in  a  little  piece,  which  appeared  in 
your  Jirst,  on  the  subject. 

The  writer  of  that  piece  did  not  think  it  essential  to  his  gene- 
ral design  to  give  a  labored  and  critical  definition  of  the  terms 
merit  and  demerit.  He  used  these  terms,  as  they  are  frequent- 
ly used  in  common  conversation,  to  express  the  useful  and  the 


462  MERIT  OF  VIRTUE 

hurtful  nature  of  virtue  and  vice — ^just  as  the  Remarker  uses 
one  of  those  terms,  when  he  asks  a  place  for  his  thoughts  on  the 
subject,  in  your  Magazine,  if  you  shall  be  of  opinion  they  merit 
it.  The  worth  of  virtue,  he  then  apprehended,  and  still  appre- 
hends, consists  in  its  usefuluess  to  the  public  interest ;  and,  the 
hatefulness  of  vice,  in  its  being  detrimental  to  general  good  and 
happiness.  Had  the  inquiry  been,  whether  the  creatures'  vir- 
tue be  equally  useful  or  beneficial  to  the  moral  system,  as  his 
vice  is  injurious  and  hurtful ;  the  arguments,  in  that  little  tract, 
would  have  applied  to  equal  advantage. 

When  it  is  said  that  the  merit  of  virtue  is  in  proportion  to  the 
natural  good  which,  in  a  common  course  of  things,  it  will  effect ; 
and  the  demerit  of  vice,  in  proportion  to  the  natural  evil  which, 
in  a  similar  way,  it  would  produce  ;  this  might  well  enough 
have  been  understood,  as  it  was  designed,  to  be  explanatory  of 
what  was  before  said,  viz.  that  the  good  or  the  evil,  which  ac- 
tions produce  or  effect,  must  be  the  rule  by  which  we  estimate 
their  merit  or  demerit.  On  a  review  of  what  was  published,  the 
writer  does  not  find  any  other  variation  of  his  definitions.  That 
the  evil  to  which  vice  tends,  in  distinction  from  what,  in  a  com- 
mon course  of  things  it  would  actually  produce  ;  or,  that  the 
good  which  virtue  would  effect  if  it  could,  and  the  evil  which 
vice  would  effect  if  it  could,  are  either  of  them  the  rule  by  which 
we  are  to  estimate  either  the  merit  of  the  former  or  the  demerit 
of  the  latter,  is  no  where  said  in  that  little  tract. 

But  the  writer,  who  remarks  on  the  piece  under  consideration, 
says  that,  if  the  virtue  of  a  third  person,  in  enjoying  the  benefit 
by  me  conferred  on  some  one  who  stands  in  need,  is  not  to  come 
into  the  account  in  estimating  the  worth  of  my  goodness  in  do- 
ing the  kindness,  it  will  follow,  that  neither  has  my  own  goodness 
any  merit  in  it,  because  a  susceptibility  of  benefits  is  essential, 
in  another,  in  order  to  his  receiving  any  good  from  me.  Can 
this  inference  be  just?  Is  there  nothing  really  praise-worthy  in 
rejoicing  in  the  good  which  is  done  to  others  ?  Does  it  detract 
anything  from  the  real  worth  of  the  virtue  of  this  third  person, 
that  it  is  in  good  done,  not  immediately  to  himself,  that  he  re- 
joices ?  And,  does  the  praise-worthiness  of  his  virtue  belong, 
not  to  him  who  exercises  it,  but  to  me,  who  have  been,  indirect- 
ly, the  occasion  of  its  being  exercised  ?  It  is  very  manifest  that 
his  virtue  neither  detracts  from,  nor  adds  to,  the  worth  of  my 
virtue  in  conferring  a  benefit  on  one  who  stood  in  need.  But, 
because  another  is  as  truly  praise-worthy  for  exercising  benevo- 
lent affection,  as  I  am,  will  it  thence  follow,  that  the  sensibility 
of  a  needy  person  to  pleasure,  which  has  nothing  either  virtuous 


AND  DEMERIT  OF  SIN.  463 

or  vicious  in  it,  in  the  least  degree  diminishes  the  worth  of  my 
virtue  in  doing  kind  offices  to  him  ? 

The  Remarker  will,  probably,  be  sensible,  upon  a  review  of 
the  subject,  that  there  is  not  the  least  ground  for  such  an  infer- 
ence. According  to  his  own  statement,  there  is  a  good,  in  fact, 
done  by  A  ;  and  B  receives  and  enjoys  it,  and  that  whether  he 
be  virtuous  or  vicious.  The  merit  of  the  virtue  of  A,  in  doing 
this  good,  must  therefore  belong  to  him.  If  C,  by  the  exercise 
of  a  virtuous  disposition,  enjoys  it,  the  praise-worthiness  of  this 
virtuous  disposition  is  certainly  his  ;  while  a  mere  sensibility  of 
pleasure  and  pain  has  nothing  of  a  moral  nature  in  it. 

But  in  this  writer's  critical  definition  of  the  terms  merit  and 
demerit,  it  is  apprehended  there  are  some  defects,  and  some  of 
his  observations  are  hardly  capable  of  defence.  He  says,  that 
inerit  involves  a  right  to  demand  a  reward  ;  but,  demerit,  no 
right  to  demand  punishment; — ih^i  justice  turns  over  the  sinner 
to  the  sovereign  disposal  of  him  whom  he  has  offended,  and  that 
a  less  punishment  than  is  deserved  may  be  inflicted.  These  are 
not  exactly  his  words ;  but,  if  I  understand  him,  this  is  the  im- 
port of  what  he  says.  This  would  imply,  that  justice  does  not 
so  much  require  vice  to  he  punished,  as  virtue  to  he  rewarded. 
If  sin  against  God  merely  exposes  to  punishment,  and  less  than 
is  deserved  may  be  inflicted,  why  will  it  not  follow,  that  justice 
doth  not  demand  that  any  punishment  at  all  shall  be  inflicted  ? 
And  if  it  do  not  demand  it,  what  evidence  is  there  that  it  will 
ev6r  be  inflicted  ?  If  justice  demand  that  any  punishment  whatever 
should  be  inflicted,  it  demands  the  whole  which  is  deserved,  as 
much  as  any  part.  If  justice,  and  the  good  of  the  universe,  do 
not  as  much  demand  that  the  Deity  express  his  displeasure  against 
the  sinner,  by  inflicting  natural  evil  upon  him,  and  that  too  equal 
to  his  desert,  as  much  as  it  is  possible  that  equity  should  give  a 
right,  in  any  case  whatever,  to  demand  a  reward ;  why  is  it  ne- 
cessary that  the  displeasure  of  the  Deity  should  ever  be  expressed 
in  any  natural  evil  1  Why  might  not  sin  have  been  forgiven 
without  an  atonement  ? 

Where  a  reward  is  due,  the  right  of  demand  lies  in  him  to 
whom  it  is  due.  But,  where  punishment  is  deserved,  the  right 
of  demand  that  it  should  be  inflicted  lies  in  the  party  injured ; 
and,  in  case  of  sin  against  God,  the  right  of  demand  lies  in  him, 
in  the  whole  universe  which  is  injured  by  the  sinner.  And  that 
justice  which  guards  the  interest  of  the  universe,  and  seeks  the 
general  good,  as  really  demands  punishment,  as  a  meritorious 
action  can,  in  any  case  whatever,  demand  a  reward. 

A  sinner,  when  possesed  of  a  properly  penitent  disposition, 


464  MODERN  LIBERALITY. 

sees  the  beauty,  and  feels  the  importance  of  justice.  Justice  ap- 
pears to  him  to  have  7'eal  demands ;  and  he  views  it  as  of  infi- 
nite importance  to  the  good  of  the  universe,  that  these  demands 
should  be  satisfied.  And  though  the  demands  of  justice  be 
against  himself,  his  benevolence  to  the  universe  still  as  really 
calls  for  their  being  satisfied,  as  true  virtue  ever  calls  for  a  re- 
ward. 

Further  observations  upon  the  subject  would,  perhaps,  be  nei- 
ther instructive  nor  entertaining  to  your  readers. 


MODERN    LIBERALITY. 

The  liberality  of  the  present  age  is  so  extravagant  that  it  runs 
into  many  absurdities ;  one  of  which  is,  that  we  are  to  teach  no 
particular  system  of  religion,  but  either  teach  no  system  at  all,  or 
every  system  alike.  This  is  plainly  implied  in  the  common  doc- 
trine so  much  insisted  on  by  many,  that  nothing  ought  to  be  done 
to  bias  the  minds  of  men  in  religion,  but  that  they  ought  to  be 
entirely  free  from  every  bias  or  influence  in  favor  of  any  one  par- 
ticular doctrine  or  system  of  religion  rather  than  another.  Now, 
all  teaching  of  any  doctrine  or  system  of  religion,  is  an  attempt 
to  persuade  and  incline  those  who  are  taught,  to  receive  that 
doctrine  or  system.  Of  course,  if  nothing  is  to  be  done  to  bias 
the  mind  of  any  man  in  favor  of  any  doctrine,  no  doctrine  is  to 
be  taught.  But  that  this  is  both  contradictory  to  the  express 
commands  of  scripture,  and  absurd  in  the  eye  of  reason,  I  pre- 
sume every  man  will  grant  who  gives  himself  the  trouble  to 
think.  It  is  as  absurd  to  imagine  that  the  most  likely  way  for  a 
man  to  become  truly  religious,  is  to  be  taught  nothing  concern- 
ing religion,  as  it  is  to  imagine  that  the  most  likely  way  for  a 
man  to  become  a  great  mathematician  or  philosopher,  is  to  be 
taught  nothing  concerning  mathematics  or  philosophy  ;  or  that  a 
man  who  is  taught  nothing  concerning  a  particular  mechanic  busi- 
ness, is  the  most  likely  to  become  an  accomplished  artist  in  that 
business. 

Or  if  it  be  said,  that  we  ought  to  teach  religion  indeed,  but 
should  teach  every  kind  or  system  of  religion  alike,  and  then 
leave  men  to  judge  for  themselves  ;  I  observe,  that  this  seems  to 
be  as  absurd,  as  to  teach  a  man  every  kind  of  mechanic  art  equal- 
ly, as  the  most  direct  way  to  make  him  a  good  shoe-maker. 

Corollary.  Hence  we  see  the  impropriety  of  putting  books  on 
every  subject,  and  containing  arguments  equally  for  and  against 


SALVATION  OF  THE  HEATHEN.  465 

the  truth,  into  the  hands  of  people  in  general.  What  is  this  but 
teaching  them  every  doctrine  of  truth  and  falsehood  equally,  in 
order  to  lead  them  into  the  truth  ?  And  this  is  as  absurd,  as  to 
teach  a  man  the  trade  of  a  blacksmith  or  a  carpenter,  in  order  to 
make  him  a  tailor. 


THE   DIVEVE   VENGEANCE. 

God  in  scripture  tells  us,  "  Vengeance  is  mine,  I  will  repay ;" 
"  I  will  avenge  me  of  mine  adversaries  ;"  "  I  will  recompense 
fury  to  mine  enemies,"  etc.  Now,  many  are  strongly  prejudiced 
against  these  expressions,  and  grievously  offended  at  them.  The 
reason  doubtless  is,  that  they  misapprehend  their  meaning.  They 
conceive  that  they  mean  the  same  which  is  commonly  meant  by 
the  same  words  among  men  ;  viz.  a  selfish,  malicious  and  furious 
passion.  But,  in  truth,  those  scriptural  expressions  mean  no 
more  than  that  God,  as  a  righteous  governor  and  judge,  will,  ac- 
cording to  strict  justice,  punish  all  rebels  against  his  government, 
so  far  as  the  general  good  of  his  kingdom,  which  is  the  intellec- 
tual universe,  requires.  If  a  wise,  just  and  good  judge  punish  a 
criminal  according  to  justice  and  the  requirements  of  the  state, 
he  may  be  said  to  avenge  the  state,  or  himself  as  the  head  and 
representative  of  the  state  on  those  criminals,  and  to  repay  or 
recompense  them  for  the  injury  they  have  done  the  state. 
And  surely  such  vengeance  is  nothing  inconsistent  with  the 
most  perfect  moral  goodness. 


THE  SALVATION  OF  THE  HEATHEN. 

In  favor  of  the  salvation  of  the  heathen,  it  is  sometimes  said, 
if  a  heathen  be  truly  virtuous  and  holy,  what  will  become  of  him  ? 
Will  he  be  cast  off  merely  because  he  is  ignorant  of  Christ ; 
though  if  he  had  known  him,  he  would  most  cheerfully  have  re- 
ceived him  as  his  Savior?  On  this  I  observe,  no  doubt  if  any 
heathen  be  truly  virtuous  and  holy  ;  if  he  love  God  supremely, 
as  an  infinitely  great,  wise,  holy  and  good  God,  and  his  neighbor 
as  himself,  he  will  be  saved.  But  the  question  is,  whether  any 
such  persons  can  be  found  among  the  heathen.  Of  the  heathen 
philosophers  Socrates  is  commonly  selected  as  the  best  and  most 
likely  to  be  a  saint.     But  it  is  generally  granted,  that  he  allowed 

Vol.  II.  40 


466  BENEVOLENCE  OE  GOD 

of  unnatural  lust,  and  lived  in  it  himself.  Plato  was  a  mere 
temporiser  in  religion  ;  Cicero  was  a  most  vain-glorious  creature  ; 
and  not  one  of  all  the  ancient  philosophers  appears  by  his  wri- 
tings or  otherwise,  to  have  possessed  that  sense  of  sin,  that  spirit 
of  humility  and  repentance,  which,  according  to  the  scriptures, 
is  so  essential  to  the  character  of  a  good  man.  Therefore  we 
have  no  evidence  that  any  one  of  them  was  possessed  of  true 
virtue  or  holiness,  and  on  that  ground  there  is  no  reason  to  be- 
lieve, that  any  of  them  are  saved. 

Nor  does  it  appear,  that  ever  any  of  the  heathen  had  just  ideas 
of  virtue  or  true  moral  goodness,  as  existing  in  men.  Humility, 
repentance,  forgiveness  of  injuries,  loving  our  enemies,  etc.  ap- 
pear not  to  have  entered  into  their  ideas  of  a  good  man.  And  if 
they  had  not  just  ideas  of  moral  goodness  in  men,  we  may  be 
sure  that  they  had  not  just  ideas  of  it  in  God,  and  of  those  per- 
fections which  constitute  the  glory  of  his  character.  And  until 
we  find  a  heathen,  who  has  just  ideas  of  true  virtue  in  men,  it  is 
an  idle  and  groundless  conjecture,  that  any  heathen  ever  as- 
cribed to  the  material  sun,  "  the  power,  wisdom,  goodness,  holi- 
ness, justice  and  grace  of  the  true  God,"  and  loved  and  worship- 
ped it  in  this  view.  A  person  who  should  ascribe  such  attributes 
to  the  sun,  and  should  love  and  worship  it  on  account  of  those 
attributes,  would  be  a  friend  to  true  virtue  and  holiness,  would 
himself  practise  true  virtue,  and  lead  a  life  of  holiness,  would 
therefore  be  a  humble  penitent,  as  well  as  a  moral  man.  and  in 
his  account  of  true  virtue  or  moral  goodness  would  express  his 
ideas  correspondently  to  the  forementioned  moral  attributes, 
which  he  ascribes  to  the  sun.  But  such  a  heathen  has  not  yet 
appeared.  Let  him  be  pointed  out,  and  it  will  be  of  more  weight 
in  the  argument,  than  a  thousand  conjectures. 


BENEVOLENCE  OF  GOD  IN  INFLICTING  PUNISHMENT. 

It  is  often  mentioned  as  a  self-evident  proposition,  as  an  axiom 
of  great  importance,  and  a  fundamental  truth,  that  God  has 
made  no  man  to  be  damned.  But  the  truth  or  falsehood  of  this 
proposition  depends  entirely  on  the  sense  of  it.  Doubtless  God 
made  every  man  with  some  definite  design,  and  for  some  deter- 
minate end.  And  if  he  did  not  make  any  man  with  a  design  that 
he  should  be  damned,  he  made  him  with  a  design  that  he  should 
not  be  damned.  Therefore,  either  all  men  are  finally  saved,  or 
else  the  design  of  God  in  the  creation  of  some  men  is  frustrated, 


IN  INFLICTING  PUNISHMENT.  467 

and  he  fails  of  the  end  at  which  he  aimed,  and  which  he  intended 
to  accornphsh.  None,  it  is  presumed,  will  assert  the  latter,  and 
none  but  universalists  the  former.  Yet  it  is  frequently  maintained 
by  those  who  are  not  universalists,  that  God  has  made  no  man 
to  he  damned. 

Will  it  not  be  allowed,  that  God  has  made  some  men  to  have 
the  tooth-ache,  others  to  have  the  small-pox,  others  to  have  the 
yellow  fever,  and  others  to  have  the  plague  ?  AVill  it  be  denied, 
that  God  made  all  men  to  die  ;  some  to  die  in  battle,  others  to  be 
drowned,  others  to  be  consumed  in  their  own  houses,  others  to 
be  tortured  to  death  by  savages  ?  If  these  things  will  not  be  de- 
nied, where  is  the  absurdity  of  supposing  that  God  has  made 
some  to  suffer  the  pains  of  hell  ?  If,  indeed,  the  pains  of  hell  be 
not  deserved  by  any  man,  we  may  boldly  assert,  that  God,  who 
is  perfectly  just,  has  made  no  man  to  suffer  these  pains.  But  al- 
lowing that  any  do  deserve  them,  by  what  argument  shall  we 
prove,  that  God  has  not  made  some  men  to  suffer  them  in  the 
same  sense  that  he  has  made  some  to  die  with  the  yellow  fever, 
to  be  drowned,  or  to  be  burnt  to  death  ? 

It  is  granted,  that  to  have  the  yellow  fever,  to  be  drowned, 
and  to  be  consumed,  is  not  the  ultimate  end  of  any  man's  crea- 
tion. Nor  is  damnation  the  ultimate  end  of  any  man's  creation. 
The  yellow  fever,  and  all  diseases  and  deaths,  are  designed  ulti- 
mately to  subserve  the  divine  glory  and  the  good  of  the  creation. 
Just  so  with  regard  to  damnation  ;  it  will  never  be  inflicted  on 
any  man,  but  with  an  ultimate  design  to  subserve  the  same  im- 
portant ends. 

If,  therefore,  when  it  is  asserted  that  God  never  made  any 
man  to  be  damned,  the  meaning  be,  that  God  never  made  any 
man  with  an  ultimate  view  to  his  damnation,  this  is  granted  ; 
but  if  the  njeaning  be,  that  God  never  made  any  man  with  a  de- 
sign that,  in  consequence  of  his  own  sin  and  desert  of  damnation, 
he  should  suffer  it,  and  thereby  promote  the  general  good  and 
the  divine  glory  ;  this  is  as  false  as  to  assert  that  God  never  made 
any  man  with  a  design  that  he  should  have  the  yellow  fever,  and 
thereby  promote  the  general  good  and  the  divine  glory. 

Some  seem  to  imagine  that  if  God  damn  any  man,  he  does  it 
from  a  malicious  disposition,  such  a  disposition  as  men  are  apt  to 
indulge  in  revenging  the  injuries  which  they  have  received.  And 
on  this  ground  they  argue  in  favor  of  universal  salvation.  They 
say  that  God  is  good,  and  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  he  is  mali- 
cious, and  disposed  to  revenge  himself  on  his  creatures ;  and 
therefore  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  he  damns  them. 

That  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  God  is  in  the  least  degree 


468  PROMISE   OF  THE   HOLY   SPIRIT. 

malicious  or  revengeful,  in  the  sense  in  which  that  word  is  com- 
monly used  among  men,  is  granted  ;  but  that  the  damnation  of  a 
sinner  implies  malice  or  a  revengeful  spirit,  is  not  granted.  It 
no  more  implies  such  a  spirit  than  those  dispensations  of  provi- 
dence, by  which  the  yellow  fever,  or  any  pestilence,  or  death  in 
any  form  is  brought  on  men.  We  might  just  as  well  argue,  that 
because  God  is  good  and  not  disposed  to  malice  and  levenge, 
therefore  it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  he  sends  the  yellow  fever, 
or  any  how  kills  men.  It  must  be  granted  by  all  who  believe 
the  existence  and  perfection  of  God,  that  whenever  he  sends  on 
his  creatures  any  calamity,  sickness  or  death,  he  does  it  from  the 
purest  goodness  and  benevolence,  to  the  system  of  intelligences. 
On  the  same  principles  we  have  a  right  to  argue,  that  whenever 
he  inflicts  damnation  on  any  creature,  he  is  actuated  by  the  same 
goodness  and  benevolence. 

Is  it  to  be  supposed  that  when  a  judge  of  established  justice 
and  goodness  condemns  a  murderer  to  the  gibbet,  he  is  actuated 
by  malice  and  revenge  ?  It  will  be  granted  that  he  may  be  ac- 
tuated by  the  most  entire  benevolence  to  his  country  and  the  cit- 
izens in  general.  Therefore,  certainly  the  judge  of  all  the  earth, 
who  will  do  right,  may,  in  condemning  a  creature  to  any  just 
punishment,  be  actuated  by  an  entire  benevolence  to  his  crea- 
tures in  general. 


PROMISE  OF  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

An  answer  to  the  QiieMion,  "  What  is  that  Asking  for  the  Holy  Spint,  to  which 
the  Communication  of  it  is  promised"?" 

The  text  referred  to  in  this  question  is  Luke  9:  13,  "  If  ye  then 
being  evil,  know  how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children  ;  how 
much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father  give  the  Holy  Spirit  to 
them  that  ask  him  ?" 

Nothing  is  more  discouraging  to  sinners,  than  the  idea,  that 
though  they  be  disposed  to  a  return  and  reconciliation  to  God, 
yet  he  on  his  part  will  not  be  reconciled  to  them.  This  is  the 
idea  of  many  ;  and  on  this  ground  they  justify  themselves  in  their 
impenitence  and  final  perdition.  They  plead  that  they  are  will- 
ing to  be  reconciled  to  God,  yet  cannot  obtain  his  grace  and  fa- 
vor.    But  Iiow  contrary  to  the  text  just  quoted  is  this  idea? 

We  all  know  the  power  of  natural  afTection  in  parents,  and 
how  readily  they  give  good  things  to  their  children.  They  very 
often  do  it  unasked,  but  especially  when  their  children  dutifully 


PROMISE  OF  THE   HOLY  SPIRIT.  469 

ask  them.  Yet  this  text  assures  us,  that  God  is  much  more  ready 
to  give  his  Holy  Spirit  to  thetn  that  ask  him,  than  the  most  affec- 
tionate earthly  parent  is  to  give  good  things  to  his  children  when 
they,  in  a  proper  manner,  ask  him. 

But  the  object  of  our  inquiry  is,  that  asking  or  praying  for  the 
Holy  Spirit,  to  which  the  promise  of  the  communication  of  it  is 
made. 

The  object  of  this  asking  is  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  to  have  this 
Spirit  is  to  be  sanctified,  to  be  made  holy,  to  be  delivered  from 
the  dominion  and  from  the  love  of  sin.  and  to  become  the  subject 
of  the  love  of  holiness  and  true  virtue.  Let  us  descend  to  parti- 
culars, and  consider  several  classes  of  sinners,  and  what  is  neces- 
sarily implied  in  their  asking  for  the  Holy  Spirit. 

The  drunkard,  in  asking  for  this  Spirit,  asks  to  be  delivered 
from  his  inordinate  love  of  strong  drink,  and  to  be  preserved  from 
the  gratification  of  that  appetite.  He  who  is  addicted  to  carnal 
desires,  in  praying  for  the  Holy  Spirit,  prays  that  all  inordinate 
desires  of  that  kind  in  him  may  be  prevented  or  extinguished. 
The  malicious  prays  that  he  may  be  preserved  from  the  exercise 
of  malice ;  the  avaricious,  that  he  may  be  preserved  from  ava- 
rice ;  the  proud,  that  he  may  be  preserved  from  pride  ;  the  man 
of  the  world,  that  he  may  be  preserved  from  the  love  of  the 
world  ;  the  unconverted,  that  he  may  be  converted,  and  delivered 
from  the  influence  of  sinful  principles  in  general ;  and  the  true 
christian,  that  he  may  be  edified  in  faith  and  holiness. 

Now,  for  these  characters  respectively  really  to  ask  or  pray  for 
the  Holy  Spirit,  is  sincerely  to  desire  or  wish  for  the  several  things 
just  mentioned  ;  and  in  general,  to  ask  for  the  Spirit,  is  to  desire 
and  wish  to  be  preserved  from  the  commission  of  sin,  to  be  de- 
livered from  the  principles  of  sin,  and  to  be  made  the  subject  of 
the  principles  of  holiness. 

Doubtless,  the  asking  intended  in  the  text  is  a  sincere  and  not 
a  hypocritical  asking.  And  what  is  a  sincere  asking  but  that 
which  is  attended  with  a  real  desire  of  the  thing  asked  ?  It  is 
illustrated  in  the  text  by  a  child's  asking  bread  of  his  parent. 
When  the  child  is  hungry,  he  asks  for  bread  sincerely  and  heart- 
ily ;  i.  e.  be  really  desires  the  bread  for  which  he  asks.  Now  if 
we  ask  for  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  its  effects  with  the  same  sincerity 
and  real  desire,  with  which  a  hungry  child  asks  bread  of  his  pa- 
rent, we  shall  undoubtedly  obtain  it. 

A  hungry  child  asks  bread  from  appetite  and  direct  desire ; 
not  because  it  is  useful  and  necessary  for  the  preservation  of  its 
life  or  health,  but  because  it  is  pleasant  and  agreeable  in  itself. 
In  this  manner  must  we  desire  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  sanctify- 

40* 


470  PROMISE   OF  THE   HOLY  SPIRIT. 

ing  effects  of  it ;  we  must  desire  them  not  merely  because  they 
are  necessary  to  our  safety  and  escape  from  misery,  but  because 
they  are  in  themselves  agreeable  to  us.  This  is  loving  holiness 
for  holiness  sake,  and  with  a  love  which  would  be  the  same  if  no 
punishment  were  to  be  the  consequence  of  the  neglect  of  holiness 
and  indulgence  of  sin,  or  if  holiness  were  not  necessary  to  escape 
punishment. 

Such  a  love  and  desire  of  holiness  as  this,  is  very  different  from 
a  desire  of  it  merely  because  it  is  a  mean  of  safety  ;  as  a  desire 
of  knowledge  or  natural  wisdom,  for  the  pleasure  of  it,  is  very 
different  from  the  desire  of  it  for  the  advantages  which  it  affords 
to  increase  our  property  or  to  succeed  our  ambitious  views ;  as 
the  desire  of  a  neighbor's  prosperity,  from  real  benevolence  and 
friendship,  is  very  different  from  the  desire  of  the  same  object, 
because  it  affords  a  prospect  of  gain  to  ourselves  ;  and  as  a  desire 
of  food  for  appetite  is  very  different  from  the  desire  of  a  tasteless 
and  nauseous  medicine,  because  it  is  necessary  to  our  life  or  health. 

That  asking,  in  the  text  under  consideration,  does  not  and 
cannot  mean  less  than  we  have  represented,  seems  plain  from 
bare  attention  to  the  subject.  Any  desire  of  holiness  short  of 
this  is  a  mere  hypocritical  desire,  a  mere  selfish  desire,  such  as 
the  most  undutiful  and  unnatural  child  may  have  of  the  prosper- 
ity of  his  father,  merely  that  he  may  share  in  that  prosperity. 
Such  a  temper  and  such  a  desire  as  this  is  consistent  with  pre- 
vailing and  governing  selfishness,  nay,  with  the  most  depraved 
principles  of  which  human  nature  is  susceptible.  And  can  it  be 
supposed,  that  the  promises  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  sanctification 
and  salvation,  which  are  connected  with  it,  are  made  to  such  de- 
sires and  such  principles  as  these  ?  This,  it  is  presumed,  will  not 
be  pretended. 

That  such  asking  as  has  been  supposed  to  be  implied  in  the 
text  under  consideration,  will  secure  the  communication  of  the 
Holy  Spirit,  appears  from  this,  that  it  implies  all  those  graces,  to 
which  the  promises  of  the  gospel,  in  general,  are  made. 

1.  It  implies  sincere  love  to  God.  He  who  asks  in  the  man- 
ner described,  the  Holy  Spirit  to  sanctify  him,  desires  holiness  as 
such,  and  rejoices  in  it.  Of  course  he  will  rejoice  in  the  perfect 
and  infinite  holiness  of  God,  and  in  God  himself.  But  this  im- 
plies reconciliation  and  true  love  to  God.  And  the  promises  are 
made  to  those  who  love  God.  Prov.  8:  17,  "I  love  them  that 
love  me,  and  those  that  seek  me  early  shall  find  me."  John  14: 
21,  "  He  that  loveth  me,  shall  be  loved  of  my  Father,  and  I  will 
love  him,  and  will  manifest  myself  to  him."  Verse  23,  "  If 
a  man  love  me,  my  Father  will  love  him,  and  we  will  come  unto 
him,  and  make  our  abode  with  him." 


MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OP  GOD.  471 

2.  It  implies  true  repentance.  He  who  loves  holiness  hates 
sin,  and  therefore  repents  of  it,  and  his  repentance  will  be  just  as 
true,  sincere  and  genuine,  as  his  love  of  holiness.  But  tlie  prom- 
ises of  the  gospel  are  made  to  repentance  :  "  Repent  and  be  con- 
verted, that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out."  Acts  3:  19,  "  Except 
ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  Luke  13:  3,  "  Whoso 
confesseth  and  forsaketh  his  sins,  shall  have  mercy." 

3.  It  implies  faith  in  Christ.  Tliis  is  a  cordial  receiving  of 
Christ  as  our  Savior.  But  they  who  love  God.  love  Christ ;  and 
they  who  love  Christ,  will  cordially  and  gladly  receive  him  as 
their  Savior  ;  which  is  faith  in  him.  But  to  faith  all  the  promi- 
ses are  made,  as  is  well  known  ;  and  God  fulfils  his  promises 
more  readily  than  any  earthly  parent  gives  bread  or  other  good 
things  to  his  children. 

If  these  observations  concerning  praying  for  the  Spirit  be  just, 
we  see  the  reason  why  so  many  who  pray  for  it,  receive  it  not. 
The  reason  is,  that  their  prayers  are  insincere.  They  desire  not 
the  Spirit  itself,  and  the  sanctifying  effects  of  it,  but  merely  the 
advantages,  the  safety,  peace  and  honor  which  are  connected 
with  the  communication  of  the  Spirit. 

Hence  also  we  see,  that  if  any  receive  not  the  Holy  Spirit,  in 
his  sanctifying  influences,  and  be  not  saved,  they  ought  to  take 
the  whole  blame  to  themselves  ;  for  if  they  sincerely  asked  for 
this  Holy  Spirit,  they  would  receive  it  and  be  saved. 

We  further  see  the  unreasonableness  of  those  who  complain 
that  they  have  been  long  asking,  seeking  and  praying  for  the 
Spirit,  but  have  not  obtained  it  ;  that  they  have  been  long  wait- 
ing at  the  throne  of  grace,  lying  at  the  pool,  all  the  while  desir- 
ing and  wishing  for  the  Spirit  to  sanctify  them  ;  but  all  in  vain  ; 
with  all  their  prayers  and  strivings  they  have  not  been  able  to  obtain 
it.  Now,  the  unreasonableness  of  this  complaint  appears  from 
this,  that  in  truth  they  have  never  once  sincerely  asked  for  the 
Holy  Spirit ;  and  the  only  proper  object  of  their  prayers,  desires 
and  strivings  has  been  their  own  safety  and  happiness.  But  so 
long  as  they  do  not  sincerely  and  directly  ask  or  desire  the  Holy 
Spirit,  it  is  perfectly  unreasonable  for  them  to  complain  that  they 
do  not  receive  it. 


THE  PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD,  FROM 
THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE. 

It  is  a  principal  argument  to  prove,  from  the  light  of  nature, 
and  without  revelation,  the  moral  perfection  of  God,  that  there  is 


472       PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

more  happiness  in  the  world  than  misery,  more  good  than  evil. 
On  this  I  observe,  ] .  That  there  is  no  certain  evidence  that  this 
is  a  fact.  It  has  been  long  disputed  by  philosophers,  and  the 
voice  of  scripture  seems  to  be  against  it.  Says  the  wise  man,  "  I 
praised  the  dead  that  are  already  dead,  more  than  the  living  that 
are  yet  alive.  Yea,  better  than  they  both  is  he  that  hath  not 
been,  who  hath  not  seen  all  the  evil  that  is  done  under  the  sun." 

2.  If  it  were  ever  so  true  and  manifest,  that  there  is  more  hap- 
piness in  the  world  than  misery,  how  does  it  hence  follow,  that 
God  is  a  being  of  entire  perfect  and  infinite  goodness  ?  Would 
a  parent,  who  needlessly  torments  his  child  one  day,  and  gratifies 
him  in  every  thing  for  the  two  preceding  days,  and  so  on  through 
life,  be  entitled  to  the  character  of  a  perfectly  good  parent  ?  Or, 
is  a  man  who  observes  the  rules  of  justice  two  thirds  of  his  time, 
and  practices  fraud  and  injustice  the  other  third,  a  perfectly  just 
man  ? 

Therefore,  of  all  arguments  to  prove  the  moral  perfections  of 
God,  this  is  perhaps  the  weakest ;  though  it  is  much  insisted  on 
by  Clarke,  Price,  Priestley,  Chauncey,  and  most  other  writers  on 
this  subject. 

If,  indeed,  the  evil  which  is  in  the  world  be  finally  made  sub- 
servient to  greater  good  than  could  otherwise  be  obtained,  the 
difliculty  vanishes.  But  in  this  case  we  need  not  insist  that  there 
is  less  evil  in  the  world  than  good.  Let  the  evil  be  ever  so  predom- 
inant, it  is  no  ground  of  objection  to  the  perfect  and  infinite  good- 
ness of  God,  provided  it  all  be  finally  made  subservient  to  great- 
er good  than  could  have  been  accomplished  in  any  other  way. 
But  how  shall  we,  without  the  aid  of  revelation,  obtain  know- 
ledge, that  the  evil  which  is  in  the  world,  whether  it  be  more  or 
less  than  the  good,  shall  be  made  subservient  to  greater  good  than 
could  have  been  accomplished  in  any  other  way  ?  If  the  light 
of  nature  afford  evidence  of  this,  it  affords  evidence  of  the  per- 
fect goodness  of  God,  Otherwise  what  evidence  of  this  does  it 
afford,  from  the  consideration  of  the  good  which  is  in  the  world  ? 

Another  argument  to  prove  the  moral  perfection  of  God  is  de- 
duced from  his  omniscience  and  omnipotence.  It  is  said,  that  as 
God  perfectly  knows  everything,  he  knows  the  nature,  the  rela- 
tions, and  fitnesses  of  things  ;  he  knows  the  nature,  fitness,  and 
beauty,  of  virtue,  and  therefore  must  choose  and  love  it ;  and  the 
choice  and  love  of  virtue  is  virtue  or  moral  goodness.  As  to  this 
I  observe,  if  by  the  knowledge  of  the  fitness  and  beauty  of  vir- 
tue be  meant  more  than  a  mere  intellectual,  or  as  it  is  common- 
ly called,  speculative  knowledge  of  it,  more  is  taken  into  the  di- 
vine omniscience  than  is  granted   to  be  contained  in  it,  and  the 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  473 

very  question  is  begged.  It  is  not  granted,  that  omniscience  in- 
volves that  apprehension  of  the  beauty  of  virtue,  which  implies 
the  direct  love  of  it.  If  this  be  indeed  involved  in  it,  let  it  be 
proved,  and  the  point  will  be  gained.  And  until  this  is  proved, 
what  evident  connection  is  there  between  omniscience  and  the 
love  and  practice  of  virtue  or  moral  goodness  ?  We  find  by  ex- 
perience, that  in  men  there  is  no  established  connection  of  this 
kind.  The  most  acute  and  the  most  learned  are  often  the  most 
vicious.  A  man  who  knows  that  virtue  is  right  and  fit,  and  that 
it  is  most  for  his  own  interest,  in  the  long-run,  to  practise  it,  yet 
is  often  devoted  to  vice.  His  vicious  bias  entirely  overcomes  his 
judgment.  In  the  case  before  us,  the  very  question  is,  whether 
the  Deity  be  not  an  evil  being,  and  consequently  under  the  gov- 
ernment of  an  evil  bias.  If  he  be,  this  may  effectually  counter- 
act the  dictates  of  omniscience,  as  well  with  respect  to  the  hap- 
piness of  the  Deity  himself,  as  with  respect  to  the  general  fitness 
and  obligation  of  virtue.  Indeed,  so  long  and  so  far  as  any  be- 
ing is  under  the  influence  of  a  vicious  bias,  he  does  not,  he  can- 
not enjoy  happiness  in  the  practice  of  virtue.  Therefore,  even 
omniscience  will  not  inform  such  a  being,  that  while  he  remains 
evil  as  he  is,  it  would  promote  his  happiness  to  pursue  any  other 
line  of  conduct  than  that  which  he  does  pursue.  Therefore  om- 
niscience will  not  dictate  to  such  a  being,  to  practice  virtue  in 
order  to  promote  his  happiness,  that  happiness  which  alone  is  any 
happiness  to  him,  or  which  he  relishes.  Omniscience  does  in- 
deed inform  him,  that  if  he  were  of  a  different  bias  or  taste,  a  dif- 
ferent line  of  conduct  would  afford  him  happiness,  and  more  happi- 
ness than  that  which  he  enjoys  in  his  present  course.  Still  this  in- 
formation will  not  change  his  bias  or  taste.  Indeed,  for  a  being 
to  become  truly  and  disinterestedly  benevolent,  from  the  mere 
motive  of  increasing  his  own  private  happiness,  would  be  a  con- 
tradiction ;  it  would  be  for  him  to  become  benevolent  without 
any  benevolent  regard  to  others,  or  without  any  benevolence. 

It  has  been  said,  that  whatever  is  in  God,  must  be  in  him  to 
an  infinite  degree,  or  without  limitation  ;  and  that  goodness  is  in 
him  is  argued  from  the  works  of  creation  and  providence,  in 
which  he  has  done  good.  Therefore  goodness  is  in  him  to  an  in- 
finite degree.  But  this  argument  may  be  retorted,  thus  :  what- 
ever is  in  God,  is  in  him  to  an  infinite  degree  ;  and  that  evil  is 
in  God  is  argued  from  the  works  of  providence,  and  from  the 
world  around  us,  in  which  there  is  so  much  evil.  Therefore  evil 
is  in  God  to  an  infinite  degree. 

In  aid  of  the  argument  from  omniscience,  omnipotence  is 
brought  in,  thus  :    As  God  is  omniscient,  he  knows  the  fitness, 


474         PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

the  beauty,  the  nature,  and  good  tendency  of  virtue,  both  to  his 
own  happiness  and  that  of  his  creatures.  And  as  he  is  omni- 
potent, he  can  be  under  no  control  or  influence,  to  divert  him 
from  what  he  knows  to  be  best.  To  this  it  is  answered,  no  doubt 
God  is  above  all  control  or  influence  from  creatures,  and  from 
without  himself.  But  the  very  question  is,  whether  he  be  not  an 
evil  or  depraved  being,  and  whether  he  be  not  under  the  influ- 
ence of  his  moral  depravity,  in  the  same  manner  that  he  is  under 
the  influence  of  goodness,  if  he  be  a  good  being.  If  he  be  an 
evil  being,  his  omnipotence  will  be  no  security  against  his  choos- 
ing or  doing  evil. 

It  may  be  objected,  that  according  to  this  reasoning  God  is  the 
subject  of  disinterested  wickedness,  which  it  is  said  is  impossible. 
To  this  I  answer,  it  is  uncertain  what  is  meant  by  disinterested 
wickedness.  If  the  pleasure  which  the  old  Romans  took  in  see- 
ing gladiators  fight  and  kill  one  another,  which  was  their  chief 
entertainment,  or  the  pleasure  vvjiich  is  now  taken  by  vast  num- 
bers in  boxing  matches,  bull-baitings,  dog-fights,  and  cock-fights, 
implies  disinterested  wickedness  ;  then  disinterested  wickedness 
is  by  no  means  an  impossibility  ;  it  is  a  very  frequent  reality.  If 
that  pleasure  be  not  disinterested,  then  the  Deity,  if  he  were  as 
morally  depraved  as  men  are  in  this  world,  may  take  a  pleasure 
which  is  not  disinterested,  in  seeing  armies  fight  and  slaughter 
one  another ;  in  seeing  houses  and  their  inhabitants  burnt ;  ships 
and  their  crews  sunk  ;  thousands  die  with  the  yellow  fever,  etc. 
If  the  Deity  had  created  the  world  and  governed  it,  to  show  vain- 
gloriously  his  power  and  skill,  this  would  have  been  moral  evil; 
but  it  would  not  have  been  disinterested  moral  evil. 

Corollary.  As  infidels  cannot,  on  their  principles,  prove  the 
goodness  or  even  the  justice  of  God  ;  so  they  have  no  founda- 
tion to  expect  happiness  in  the  future  state.  They  have  no 
foundation  to  believe,  that  God  will  treat  them  benevolently,  or 
even  justly  ;  because  they  have  no  evidence  that  he  is  a  benevo- 
lent or  a  just  being. 


[Some  criticisms  hy  an  anonymous  icriter  were  made  on  the  views  expressed  in 
the  preceding  article  ;  to  which  the  following  reply  tvas  made.] 

The  author  of  the  piece  inserted  in  this  work,  vol.  i.  p.  382, 
believes,  that  the  moral  perfections  of  God  are  capable  of  proof 
from  the  light  of  nature.     His  arguments  are  the  following: 

1.  The  evils  of  this  life  are  punishments  of  sin,  and  therefore 
are   no  ground  of  objection   to  the  perfect  goodness  of  God. 


PROM  THE  LIGHT  OP  NATURE.  475 

Ans.  Imprisonments,  cropping,  branding,  and  execution,  are  pu- 
nishments of  vice  ;  but  they  do  not  demonstrate  the  perfect  good- 
ness of  the  magistrate,  or  of  the  executioner,  by  whom  they  are 
inflicted.  Besides,  an  objector  might  say,  the  evils  of  tliis  life 
are  punishments  of  virtue,  and  call  on  our  author  for  proof  to  the 
contrary.  Punishments  may  be  inflicted  for  crimes,  and  yet  not 
be  inflicted  with  perfect  equality  and  perfect  regard  to  the  general 
good.  And  how  shall  we  know,  from  the  light  of  nature,  that 
the  punishments,  which  God  inflicts  on  men  in  this  life,  are  in- 
flicted equally  according  to  their  respective  characters  ;  or  that 
those  punishments  are  necessary  and  subservient  to  the  divine 
glory  and  the  general  good  of  the  universe  ?  It  does  not  yet  ap- 
pear, that  either  of  these  can  he  known  without  revelation.  Our 
author's  argument  supposes,  that  the  present  is  a  state  of  retribu- 
tion, and  of  perfectly  equal  retribution  too  ;  for  an  unequal  retri- 
bution is  neither  an  argument  for  the  perfect  goodness  of  God  nor 
an  answer  to  the  objection  arising  from  the  evil  in  the  world. 
That  the  present  is  a  state  of  equal  retribution  will  not  be  pre- 
tended by  our  author,  and  is  contrary  to  scripture  and  universal 
observation.  "  All  things  come  alike  to  all  ;  there  is  one  event  to 
the  righteous  and  to  the  wicked  ;  to  the  good  and  to  the  clean, 
and  to  the  unclean."  If  the  present  were  a  state  of  equal  retribu- 
tion, we  should  lose  the  piincipal,  if  not  the  only  argument  from 
the  light  of  nature,  in  favor  of  a  future  state  ;  and  as  sin,  in  that 
case,  would  be  fully  punished  in  this  life,  there  could  be  no  pun- 
ishment of  any  man  in  the  future  world. 

Besides,  to  be  able  to  account  for  the  natural  evil  in  the  world 
is  not  sufficient  to  vindicate  the  divine  goodness  ;  we  must  be 
able  also  to  account  for  moral  evil  ;  for  this  did  not  come  into 
the  world  without  the  providence,  or  at  least  without  the  know- 
ledge and  permission  of  God.  If  God  exercised  any  positive  in- 
fluence, in  order  to  the  introduction  of  moral  evil,  it  will  be  grant- 
ed on  all  hands,  that  in  order  to  vindicate  the  divine  goodness,  we 
must  show,  that  this  evil  is  finally  subservient  to  good.  Andean 
this  be  done  by  the  bare  light  of  nature  ?  Or  if  we  hold,  that  God 
Was  so  inactive  in  this  matter  as  to  stand  by  and  barely  permit 
moral  evil  to  come  into  existence,  still  we  shall  not  be  able  to  vin- 
dicate the  divine  goodness,  otherwise  than  by  proving,  that  sin  is 
subservient  to  the  general  good.  So  long  as  this  is  not  proved, 
it  does  not  appear  but  that  God  stood  by  and  consented  to  an 
event  by  which  the  universe  was  ruined  or  greatly  impaired. 
Therefore,  let  our  author  show,  from  the  light  of  nature,  that  sin 
is  subservient  to  the  greatest  good  of  the  universe,  and  he  will  do 
something  decisive  in  the  case  ;  but  to  say  that  God  has  caused 


476        PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

or  permitted  sin,  that  lie  might  punish  it,  whether  in  this  or  a  fu- 
ture state,  is  no  more  a  vindication  of  the  divine  goodness,  than 
it  would  be  a  vindication  of  the  goodness  of  a  parent  to  say  that 
he  has  wounded  his  son,  or  permitted  him  to  be  wounded,  mere- 
ly that  he  might  heal  him  again. 

Or,  if  it  should  be  said,  that  sin  was  neither  caused  nor  per- 
mitted by  God,  but  that  it  came  into  the  system  without  iiis  con- 
sent, and  although  he  did  all  he  could  to  keep  it  out,  the  ques- 
tion will  return,  how  can  this  be  proved,  especially  by  the  light  of 
nature  ? 

2.  Another  of  our  author's  arguments  is.  that  God  has  annex- 
ed pain  to  evil  actions,  and  pleasure  to  virtuous  ones.  But,  does 
this  prove,  that  God  is  perfectly  and  infinitely  good  ?  If  not,  the 
point  remains  unsettled.  I  conceive,  that  this  no  more  proves 
the  perfect  goodness  of  God  than  the  communication  of  some 
good  to  mankind  proves  it.  Indeed,  it  is  substantially  the  same 
argument  which  we  before  considered  ;  that  was,  that  God  re- 
wards virtue  and  punishes  vice  in  this  life  ;  that  is,  that  God  has 
annexed  pain  to  vice,  and  pleasure  to  virtue.  Besides,  is  not 
pleasure  annexed  to  many  vices  ?  Is  there  no  pleasure,  enjoyed 
by  the  man  of  pleasure,  by  the  epicure,  the  wanton  and  dissipa- 
ted ?     Is  not  revenge  sweet  ? 

3.  Our  author  proceeds  : — Whatever  evils  the  general  laws,  by 
which  the  moral  world  is  governed,  produce,  are  subservient  to 
the  general  good.  How  does  it  appear  to  be  subservient  to  the 
general  good,  that  there  is  so  much  sickness,  mortification,  disap- 
pointment, and  death  in  the  world  ?  Yet  these  frequently,  if  not 
generally,  take  place  by  general  laws.  Fevers,  pestilences,  storms, 
shipwrecks,  and  consequent  disappointments,  bankruptcies,  pover- 
ty and  shame,  take  place  by  general  laws  ;  so  does  death.  But 
how  does  it  appear,  that  these  general  laws  themselves  are  subser- 
vient to  the  general  good  ?  Our  author  seems  here,  as  in  many 
other  parts  of  his  piece,  to  take  for  granted  the  very  thing  in 
question,  which  is,  that  God  is  perfectly  good,  and  therefore  that 
the  laws  which  he  has  established,  are  subservient  to  good.  Was 
it  not  in  the  power  of  the  Deity  to  place  us  in  a  world  governed 
by  laws,  by  which  we  should  be  liable  to  less  evil  than  attends  us 
in  this  world  ?  If  it  should  be  said,  that  such  a  state  would  not 
be  so  suitable  for  us  as  the  present,  nor  so  subservient  to  the  gen- 
eral good,  the  question  would  recur,  How  does  this  appear  by  the 
bare  light  of  nature  ?  Or  how  does  it  appear  that  the  general 
good  requires,  that  we  should  be  just  such  creatures  as  we  are. 

4.  "  God  has  made  us  capable  of  the  highest  improvement." 
How  does  this,  if  it  were  granted,  prove  the  perfect  goodness  of 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  477 

God  ?  Still  we  suffer  much  misery.  But  it  is  not  granted  ;  even 
Sir  Isaac  Newton  never  attained  to  the  highest  improvement,  un- 
less by  the  highest  be  meant  very  low  improvement,  in  compari- 
son with  what  is  possible  for  a  creature. 

5.  "  The  pains  and  evils  of  this  life  are  suited  to  our  state." 
In  the  first  place,  this,  in  many  cases,  may  be  questioned.  If,  by 
state,  he  meant  world,  we  are  all  in  one  state  ;  and  yet  we  suf- 
fer very  different  evils.  And  this  is  true  of  those  who  are  in  very 
similar  circumstances  in  the  world.  In  the  second  place,  how 
does  it  appear,  that  our  state  is  a  suitable  state,  subservient,  in 
the  highest  degree  to  the  general  good  ?  Our  author  adds,  that 
"  those  evils  are  clearly  calculated  to  promote,  on  the  whole,  our 
own  happiness."  If  this  were  proved,  it  would  go  far  toward 
settling  the  dispute  ;  but  as  it  stands  in  the  piece  under  conside- 
ration, it  is  without  proof ;  therefore  it  is  sufficient  to  answer, 
"  they  are"  7iot  by  the  light  of  nature,  "  clearly  calculated  to  pro- 
mote, on  the  whole,  our  own  happiness." 

From  these  premises,  our  author  infers,  that  "  natural  evil  does 
not,  in  the  least,  obscure  the  evidence  that  God  is  good,  de- 
rived from  the  happiness  in  the  world.  Can  this  consequence  be 
fairly  drawn  from  any  or  all  of  the  foregoing  premises  ?  Is  the 
happiness  in  the  world  an  evidence,  that  God  is  good,  equal  to 
what  it  would  be,  if  there  were  no  natural  evil  in  the  world,  but 
the  happiness  were  entire  and  undiminished  by  misery  ?  Let  the 
candid  answer  this  inquiry. 

Lastly,  our  author  argues  his  point  from  the  scripture,  which 
asserts,  that  "  the  earth  is  full  of  God's  goodness."  It  is  undoubt- 
ed, that  the  earth  is  full  of  God's  goodness  in  a  proper  sense ; 
but  the  question  is,  in  what  sense  is  this  true  ?  It  will  not  be  pre- 
tended, even  by  our  author,  that  there  is  nothing  but  good  in  the 
earth,  unless  it  be  in  this  sense,  that  there  is  nothing  in  the  earth 
which  will  not  be  finally  overruled  for  good.  And  how  this  should 
be  known  by  the  bare  light  of  nature,  is  as  difficult  to  be  shown, 
as  that  God  is  a  being  of  absolute  moral  perfection.  The  earth 
is  full  of  good,  intermixed  with  evil,  and  which  predominates,  has 
long  been  a  matter  of  dispute.  And  how  from  this  nearly  equal 
mixture  of  good  and  evil,  can  the  perfect  goodness  of  God  be  in- 
ferred ?  If  it  could  be  clearly  shown,  that  the  greatest  part  of 
this  mixture  is  good  ;  how  could  it  be  thence  concluded,  that  the 
author  of  this  mixture  is  perfectly  good  1  It  is  granted,  that  the 
heavens  declare  the  glorious  power  and  skill  of  the  Lord  ;  but  do 
they  also  declare  that  he  is  perfectly  good,  and  that  in  him  is  no 
evil  at  all  ?  If  they  do  not,  our  author  has  not  gained  his  point. 
Also  it  is  granted,  that  God  has  not  left  himself  without  witness. 

Vol.  IL  41 


478       PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

and  that  he  has  given  mankind  rain  and  fruitful  seasons,  filling 
their  hearts  with  food  and  gladness.  But  an  objector  may  say, 
that  he  has  not  left  himself  without  witness,  and  that  he  has  giv- 
en drought  and  unfruitful  seasons,  filling  their  hearts  with  hunger 
and  sadness.  Hume  grants,  that  so  far  as  God  has  done  good, 
we  may  argue  that  God  is  good  ;  and  at  the  same  time  contends, 
that  so  far  as  he  sends  evil,  we  have  the  same  evidence,  that  he 
is  evil,  and,  on  the  whole,  that  we  are  to  conclude,  that  he  is  of 
a  mixed  character.  But  the  most  plausible  text  brought  by  our 
author,  and  which  is  always  brought  on  the  like  occasion,  is  Rom, 
1:  19,  20.  "That  which  may  be  known  of  God,  is  manifest  in 
them  ;  for  God  hath  showed  it  unto  them.  For  the  invisible  things 
of  him  from  the  creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  un- 
derstood by  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal  power  and 
godhead."  These  words  must  be  understood  with  some  limita- 
tion, or  they  will  prove  too  much  for  even  our  author.  The  apos- 
tle here  asserts  a  matter  of  fact,  not  a  mere  possibility,  what  was 
actually  seen  and  known,  and  not  merely  what  might  be  seen  and 
known,  and  of  which  the  evidence  might  be  traced  out.  Now, 
will  our  author  pretend,  that  the  absolute  moral  perfection  of  God 
was,  in  fact,  clearly  seen  by  the  heathen,  by  the  help  of  the  bare 
light  of  nature,  without  any  aid  from  revelation,  whether  written 
or  traditional  ?  I  believe  he  will  not  choose  to  assert  it.  But  if 
he  will  not  assert  this  to  be  contained  in  the  text  last  cited,  it 
will  not  answer  his  purpose.  I  may  grant,  that  the  moral  char- 
acter of  God  was  manifest  to  some  of  the  heathen,  by  the  evi- 
dence which  God  has  given  in  the  works  of  creation  and  provi- 
dence, together  ivith  revelation,  the  knowledge  of  which  was 
either  derived  from  the  Jews,  or  handed  down  from  primitive 
times.  Thus,  in  the  first  place,  the  invisible  things  of  God  might 
be,  by  some  of  them,  clearly  seen  by  revelation  ;  and  then,  by 
comparing  this  revelation  with  the  works  of  creation  and  provi- 
dence, those  invisible  things  might  be  further  illustrated,  and  more 
thoroughly  understood.  So  that  this  text,  which  is  commonly 
brought  as  decisive  in  favor  of  the  proof  of  God's  moral  perfec- 
tion, from  the  light  of  nature,  appears  to  be  easily  capable  of  a 
very  different  construction,  and  therefore  decides  nothing  as  to 
the  present  question.  I  beg  leave  to  add,  that  the  text  examined 
in  the  original,  most  naturally  leads  to  a  sense  somewhat  different 
from  that  just  now  given.  The  literal  translation  is,  the  invisi- 
ble things  of  him  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  are  clearly  seen, 
being  minded  or  thought  upon  by  the  things  which  are  made ; 
i.  e.  by  the  works  of  God,  those  who  are  considerate  among  man- 
kind, were  even  from  the  time  of  the  creation,  led  to  think  of  the 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  479 

invisible  things  of  God ;  and  by  the  aid  of  revelation,  w^hich  by 
tradition  or  derivation  from  the  Jews,  was  in  a  degree  circulating 
among  even  the  heathen,  they  clearly  saw  those  invisible  things. 
The  participle  voovf-uvu  properly  signifies  minded,  thought  of,  or 
considered,  and  not  so  properly  understood.  The  use  of  it  in 
the  New  Testament  proves  this,  when  all  the  instances  in  which 
this  or  the  verb  vouo  occurs,  arc  considered  and  compared. 

It  is  further  to  be  observed,  that  the  apostle  does  not  say,  that 
in  the  invisible  things  of  God,  he  meant  to  include  his  moral 
perfection  ;  but  he  explains  himself  to  mean  by  invisible  things, 
eternal  power,  and  godhead,  or  supremacy ;  and  that  anything 
more  was  included  by  the  apostle  in  the  term  godhead,  remains 
to  be  proved. 


Our  author,*  says,  '•  it  will  be  admitted,  that  when  the  regard 
which  men  have  for  their  own  felicity,  or  the  good  of  their  own 
personal  being,  does  not  exceed  the  quantity,  and  in  that  sense, 
the  merit  of  their  existence,  it  cannot  be  criminal."  This  is  not 
admitted,  because  it  implies,  that  a  man  whose  quantity  of  exis- 
tence is  equal  to  10,  and  who  places  all  his  happiness  in  drunken- 
ness and  debauchery,  may  lawfully  regard  this  his  happiness,  ac- 
cording to  the  quantity  of  his  existence  ;  i.  e.  with  a  regard  equal 
to  No.  10.  Therefore,  this  man,  in  regarding  his  carnal  happi- 
ness aforesaid,  to  the  degree  of  10,  is  innocent,  nay,  is  virtuous. 
And  if  he  have  a  neighbor  whose  quantity  of  existence  is  equal  to 
5,  and  who  places  all  his  happiness  in  the  emotions  and  practice 
of  piety  and  virtue  ;  the  man  first  supposed  ought  to  regard  his 
own  happiness  in  drunkenness  and  debauchery  twice  as  much  as 
the  happiness  of  his  neighbor  consisting  in  benevolence  and  be- 
neficence ;  and  whenever  the  happiness  of  the  latter  stands  in 
competition  with  that  of  the  former,  he  may  lawfully  and  virtu- 
ously sacrifice  it  to  his  own  pleasure,  in  drunkenness  and  de- 
bauchery. And  would  not  this  make  it  lawful  and  virtuous  for 
any  man  to  sacrifice  to  his  lust  the  chastity  of  any  woman  of  a 
quantity  of  being  less  than  his  own  ?  On  this  principle,  any  man 
placing  his  happiness  in  what  he  will,  has  a  right  to  sacrifice  to 
that  happiness  the  happiness  of  any  other  man  whose  quantity  of 
being  is  less  than  his  own  ;  and  provided  Nero  was  possessed  of 

*  Referring  to  an  anonymous  writer  who  endeavored  to  prove  the  moral 
perfections  of  God  from  the  light  of  nature,  in  answer  to  another  corres- 
pondent w  hose  signature  was  N. 


480         PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

a  quantity  of  being  superior  to  that  of  all  Rome,  and  he  took  su- 
preme happiness  in  seeing  houses  and  their  inhabitants  burn- 
ing together,  he  would  have  done  his  duty  in  setting  Rome  on 
fire,  and  fiddling  while  he  contemplated  the  flames,  and  feasted 
on  the  dying  shrieks  of  men,  women,  and  children. 

"  The  supposition,"  says  our  author,  "  that  a  sinner  should  be 
possessed  of  infinite  being  without  a  change  of  heart,  involves 
in  it  an  absurdity.  The  views  and  interest  of  a  sinner  are  pri- 
vate and  partial ;  in  this  consists  selfishness.  This  disunites  and 
separates  him  from  being  in  general.  But  that  a  private  and  sep- 
arate interest  should  become  infinite,  and  yet  remain  private  and 
separate,  it  will  be  readily  seen  is  naturally  impossible.  That 
those  affections  which  separate  the  subject  from  infinite  being 
should  become  infinite,  and  still  in  their  exercises  separate  the 
subject  from  infinite  being,  is  a  manifest  absurdity.  Nothing  can 
be  more  absurd  and  inconsistent  with  itself  than  the  supposition 
of  an  infinite  private  interest — infinite  selfishness."  On  this  I 
remark, 

1.  The  very  question,  in  debate  is,  whether  God,  an  infinite 
being,  be  sinful  or  holy  ;  and  to  say,  that  it  is  absurd  to  suppose 
that  this  infinite  being  is  a  sinner,  is  to  assume  the  thing  in  ques- 
tion.    Let  this  be  proved  and  the  point  is  settled. 

2.  When  our  author  says,  '•  The  views  and  interest  of  a  sin- 
ner are  private  and  partial,"  there  is  an  ambiguity  in  his  words. 
If  he  mean,  that  the  views  and  interests  of  a  finite  sinner  are  de- 
tached from  the  interest  of  the  universe,  I  grant  it ;  but  if  we 
suppose  that  this  finite  sinner  becomes  infinite,  and  infinitely  ex- 
ceeds all  other  beings  ;  though  the  fact  is  acknowledged  to  be  im- 
possible, yet  supposing  it  to  take  place,  his  views  and  interest, 
though  the  temper  of  his  heart  remain  the  same,  are  no  longer 
detached  from  the  interest  or  happiness  of  being  in  general,  as  he 
is  now  become  as  it  were  the  whole,  and  his  interest  is,  of  course, 
the  interest  of  being  in  general.  Or  if  we  apply  the  expression 
last  quoted  to  the  Deity,  and  say,  that  his  views  and  interest,  sup- 
posing him  to  be  sinful,  are  private  and  partial,  still  this  needs 
explanation.  If  it  mean  that  the  views  of  the  Deity  are  with- 
out benevolence  to  other  beings,  I  grant  it ;  his  views  and  aims 
terminate  in  those  objects  which  are  merely  personal,  not  imply- 
ing any  good  will  to  others.  In  this  their  sinfulness  consists. 
But  if  it  mean,  that  the  views  and  interest  of  the  Deity  are  not 
the  views  and  interest  of  being  in  general,  I  grant  that  they  are  ; 
because,  as  he  is  an  infinite  being,  he  is  being  in  general.  Still 
his  views  and  aims  are  the  very  same  in  kind  with  those  of  ev- 
ery sinner  ;  all  the  difference  is  merely  relative,  as  he  stands  in 


FROM  THE  LIGHT   OF  NATURE.  481 

the  relation  of  a  head  to  the  universe,  and  is  infinitely  the  great- 
est being,  which  they  are  not.  The  ambiguity  of  the  expression, 
then,  is  this  ;  it  may  mean,  either,  that  the  views  and  aims  of  the 
Deity  are  without  benevolence  to  other  beings,  which  is  granted, 
and  in  which  there  is  no  absurdity,  supposing  him  to  be  an  evil 
being  ;  or,  that  his  views  and  aims  are  not  the  views  and  aims  of 
being  in  general,  which  is  not  pretended. 

3.  Our  author  says,  "  this"  i.  e.  the  circumstance  that  his  views 
and  interests  are  private  and  partial,  "  disunites  and  separates 
him  from  being  in  general."  I  deny  that  the  same  love  of  hon- 
or, of  ease,  and  of  private  personal  good,  which  are  natural  to 
mankind,  if  they  existed  in  the  Deity,  would  disunite  and  separ- 
ate him  from  being  in  general.  Because,  as  he  is  being  in  gene- 
ral, however  selfish  he  be,  he  is  united  to  himself,  and  therefore 
united  to  being  in  general  ;  unless  by  union  to  being  in  general 
be  meant  something  more  than  the  Deity's  bare  love  of  himself, 
and  of  his  own  happiness,  in  whatever  that  happiness  consist. 
But  nothing  more  than  this  is  granted ;  and  to  suppose  any  more 
is  to  beg  the  question. 

4.  Our  author  proceeds  :  "  But  that  a  private  and  separate  in- 
terest should  become  infinite,  and  yet  remain  private  and  separ- 
ate, it  is  seen  is  naturally  impossible."  I  grant,  that  nothing 
finite  can  become  infinite.  But  the  question  is,  whether  the  in- 
terest of  an  infinite  being  may  not  be  selfish,  and,  in  that  sense, 
private  and  separate  from  the  interest  of  all  other  beings  ;  not 
whether  it  may  be  separate  from  the  interest  of  being  in  general, 
including  the  infinite  being  ;  because  the  infinite  being  infinitely 
exceeds  all  others  taken  together,  and  he  himself  is  being  in  gen- 
eral. What  does  our  author  mean  by  private  and  separate  inter- 
est ?  If  he  mean  an  interest  separate  from  that  in  which  being 
in  general  in  fact  does  place  its  happiness,  I  grant  that  it  is  nat- 
urally impossible  that  the  Deity  should  have  a  private  and  separ- 
ate interest.  But  if  he  mean  an  interest  which  is  separate  from 
that  in  which  being  in  general  ought  to  place  its  happiness,  which 
includes  no  benevolence  to  others,  which  does  not  comprehend 
the  interest  of  others,  but  is  opposed  to  it,  as  it  is  perfect  selfish- 
ness ;  to  say  that  it  is  impossible  that  the  Deity  should  have  such 
an  interest  as  this,  is  to  beg  the  question. 

5.  It  is  supposed  by  our  author,  that  true  virtue  consists  in  a 
regard  to  the  happiness  or  interest  of  being  in  general.  But 
this  is  as  ambiguous  as  any  phrase  on  which  I  have  remarked. 
If  that  definition  mean  benevolence,  and  a  regard  to  the  happi- 
ness of  others,  so  far  as  that  happiness  is  consistent  with  benev- 
olence ;  I  allow  it  to  be  a  true  definition.    But  if  being  in  general 

41* 


482        PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

place  its  happiness  in  excessive  animal  gratifications,  in  pomp 
and  vain  glory,  in  love  of  personal  ease  and  enjoyment,  without 
benevolence,  or  in  tormenting  others ;  to  regard  or  wish  well  to 
such  happiness  of  being  in  general,  is  no  virtue  ;  it  is  vice  ;  it  is 
to  wish  well  to  wickedness  ;  nor  is  it  true  benevolence.  True 
benevolence  is  to  wish  the  best,  purest,  and  highest  kind  of  hap- 
piness to  being  in  general.  But  the  happiness  above  described, 
is  very  far  from  the  best,  purest,  and  highest  kind.  Therefore, 
to  wish  well  to  such  happiness,  is  to  oppose  true  and  real  benev- 
olence. 

6.  Our  author  proceeds  :  "  That  those  affections  which  separ- 
ate the  subject  from  infinite  being  ;  should  become  infinite,  and 
still,  in  their  exercises,  separate  the  subject  from  infinite  being,  is 
a  manifest  absurdity."  But  is  there  any  absurdity  in  the  suppo- 
sition, that  the  infinite  Creator  of  all  should  be  the  subject  of  in- 
finitely strong  love  to  himselfi,  and  his  own  private  happiness, 
without  any  benevolence  to  his  creatures  ;  and  thus,  that  this 
self-love  should  separate  him  from  his  creatures  ?  I  pretend  not 
that  this  self-love  would  separate  the  Creator  from  himself,  and 
so  from  infinite  being,  unless  it  be  in  this  sense,  that  it  would 
separate  him  from  that  happiness  which,  if  he  had  a  relish  for  it, 
would  afford  him  a  far  greater,  more  pure,  and  rational  enjoyment 
than  that  of  which,  in  this  argument,  he  is  supposed  to  be  the 
subject.  If  it  be  observed  that  the  Deity  should  be  the  subject 
of  an  infinitely  strong  affection,  which  in  this  sense  separates 
him  from  himself,  or  from  that  which  ought  to  be  his  interest, 
and  is  his  true  interest,  let  it  be  pointed  out. 

7.  ^'  Nothing  can  be  more  absurd  and  inconsistent  with  itself, 
than  the  supposition  of  an  infinite  private  interest — infinite  self- 
ishness." There  is  here  still  the  same  ambiguity  in  the  word 
private.  If  infinite  private  interest  mean  an  interest  separate 
from  that  of  the  Deity,  and  so  of  being  in  general,  I  grant  that 
there  can  be  no  infinite  private  interest.  But  if  it  mean  an  in- 
terest separate  from  the  interest  of  others,  i.  e.  creatures  ;  to  sup- 
pose that  the  Deity  cannot  have  such  an  interest,  is  to  take  for 
granted  the  very  thing  in  dispute.  Also  to  suppose,  that  the 
Deity  is  not  the  subject  of  an  infinitely  strong  attachment  to  his 
own  private  personal  happiness,  without  benevolence  to  his  crea- 
tures, which  is  selfishness,  is  in  like  manner  to  take  for  granted 
the  thing  in  dispute. 

"  If  the  Divine  existence  is  so  unlimited  that  the  supposition 
of  an  addition  to  the  quantity  of  existence  in  the  universe  is  in- 
admissible, God's  benevolent  regards  to  his  own  infinite  being 
must,  of  course,  imply  benevolence  to  being  in  general,  compre- 


PROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  483 

hending  the  created  system."  This  is  a  very  important  proposi- 
tion, the  very  proposition  in  dispute;  but  where  is  the  proof ? 
If  this  be  proved,  the  dispute  is  settled.  The  author  seems  to 
suppose,  that  if  it  be  granted  that  the  divine  infinity  is  such,  that 
the  quantity  of  existence  is  incapable  of  increase  ;  it  follows,  of 
course,  that  God's  benevolence  to  himself,  is  benevolence  to  the 
created  system.  Though  infinite  existence,  in  a  certain  sense, 
cannot  be  increased,  yet  God  and  his  creatures  are  not  one  and 
the  same.  Therefore,  benevolence  to  one  does  not  imply  benev- 
olence to  the  other.  For  God,  to  have  benevolence  to  himself, 
is  to  wish  happiness  to  himself.  But  this  does  not  imply,  that  he 
wishes  happiness  to  his  creatures — So  that  the  main  point  is  yet 
to  be  proved. 


The  Theological  Magazine,  vol.  iii.  p.  28,  contains  remarks  on 
a  piece  which  I  had  befoie  published  in  the  same  work.  In  this 
piece  the  object  is,  to  prove,  by  the  light  of  nature,  that  God  is 
a  being  of  moral  perfection.  To  this  end,  our  author  observes, 
"  that  the  suffering  of  merited  evil,  acknowledged  to  be  such  by 
impartial  reason,  does  not  obscure  or  lesson  the  evidence  we  have 
of  the  goodness  of  God  arising  from  the  positive  good  we  enjoy." 
On  this  I  remark,  it  is  not  acknowledged  to  be  evident  by  the 
bare  light  of  nature,  that  all  the  evils  in  the  world  are  merited. 
How  does  it  appear  by  that  light,  that  children  and  infants  merit 
all  they  suffer  in  life  and  death  ?  How,  that  the  brutal  creation 
merits  all  its  sufferings  ?  Not  to  insist  on  the  case  of  those,  "  of 
whom  the  world  was  not  worthy,  who  were  stoned,  were  sawn 
asunder,  were  tempted,  were  slain  with  the  sword,  and  wander- 
ed about  in  sheep-skins  and  goat-skins,  destitute,  afflicted,  tor- 
mented." 

Or  supposing  it  were  evident,  that  the  evils  in  the  world  were 
merited  by  the  subjects  of  them ;  how  is  it  evident,  by  the  light 
of  nature,  that  the  general  good  requires  and  is  promoted  by  all 
those  evils  ?  Let  them  be  ever  so  justly  deserved,  it  does  not 
thence  follow,  that  the  general  good  and  divine  glory,  require 
that  they  be  inflicted,  especially  in  case  of  repentance  and  refor- 
mation. As  on  the  principles  of  Christianity,  though  every  saint 
deserves  endless  punishment,  yet  the  general  good  and  the  divine 
glory  do  not  require  nor  admit  that  he  suffer  it.  I  think  that  our 
author  himself  will  not  say,  that  it  is  evident,  by  the  bare  light  of 
nature,  that  the  general  good  requires,  that  in  this  world,  "  all 
things  should  come  alike  to  all."     And  if  it  be  not  evident,  that 


484       PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTION^S  OF  GOD 

all  the  evils  in  the  world  are  reconcilable  with  the  general  good, 
it  is  not  evident,  that  they  are  reconcilable  with  perfect  good- 
ness in  God,  as  perfect  goodness  in  him  will  do  that  only  which 
is  subservient  to  the  general  good. 

I  have  to  observe  further;  supposing  it  were  evident,  that  all 
the  evils  in  the  world  are  merited  by  those  who  suffer  them  ;  how 
does  the  light  of  nature  teach  that  the  governor  of  the  world  in- 
flicts those  evils  on  account  of  the  demerit  of  the  subjects  ?  What 
proof  does  that  light  afford,  that  those  evils,  at  least  some  of  them, 
are  not  inflicted  as  a  punishment  of  the  good  deeds  of  those  who 
suffer  them  ?  To  this  our  author  answers,  "  the  proof  is  con- 
sciousness, that  we  merit  them  for  our  faults." 

I  reply,  suppose  we  are  conscious  of  our  own  faults,  is  this  a 
proof  that  the  governor  of  the  world  punishes  us  for  our  demerit? 
We  may  be  conscious  of  our  own  demerit  or  faults,  but  we  can- 
not be  conscious  of  the  motives  of  his  conduct  in  the  infliction  of 
evil.  The  argument  stands  thus ;  we  have  faults,  we  are  con- 
scious of  them  ;  therefore,  all  the  evils  we  suffer,  are  punishments 
inflicted  upon  us  by  the  Deity,  from  the  motives  of  abhorrence  of 
those  faults,  and  a  design  to  prevent  them  in  future.  Whether 
this  reasoning  be  conclusive  to  one,  who  doubts  concerning  the 
moral  perfections  of  God,  the  reader  will  determine. 

I  may  add,  that  our  consciousness  that  we  have  faults,  is  our 
mere  opinion  that  we  have  faults  ;  that  some  of  our  actions  are 
faulty.  Of  the  actions  we  are  or  may  be  conscious,  and  this  con- 
sciousness may  imply  as  great  a  certainty  as  we  have  of  our  own 
existence.  But  of  (he  faultiness  of  our  actions,  we  are  no  more 
conscious  than  we  are  of  the  faultiness  of  the  same  actions  per- 
formed by  another  person.  Consciousness  o{ fault  is  a  very  dif- 
ferent thing  from  the  consciousness  of  our  own  acts  or  exercises. 
The  latter  carries  absolute  and  intuitive  certainty  with  it.  The 
former  is  extremely  variable,  depending  on  our  education,  asso- 
ciation of  ideas,  the  country,  age,  nation,  and  state  of  society  in 
which  we  live.  It  is  the  mere  dictate  of  our  conscience,  which 
is  true  or  false,  as  it  is  well  or  ill  informed.  Saul  was  not  con- 
scious of  any  fault  in  persecuting  the  church.  An  Indian  is  not 
conscious  of  any  in  torturing  his  captive.  Therefore,  this  kind 
of  consciousness  is  a  poor  touch-stone  of  right  and  wrong,  and  a 
still  poorer  proof  of  the  moral  perfection  of  God. 

Our  author  says,  "  the  argument,"  which  he  had  urged  in  his 
first  piece,  "  did  not  require  positive  evidence  of  the  goodness  of 
God  from  the  infliction  of  merited  evil  itself ;  it  was  satisfied  in 
showing  that  such  infliction  was  not  inconsistent  with  his  good- 
ness."    But  the  infliction  of  evil  is  inconsistent  with  his  good- 


FROM   THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  485 

ness,  unless  it  be  inflicted  in  subserviency  to  good,  and  with  a 
design  to  promote  it;  and  that  although  the  evil  be  merited  by 
those  on  whom  it  is  inflicted.  And  how  does  the  light  of  nature 
show  this  ?  Until  it  shall  show  this,  it  will  by  no  means  answer 
the  objection  to  divine  goodness,  arising  from  the  evil  in  the 
world.  Our  author  in  his  first  piece,  grants,  that  "  if  the  misery 
inflicted  on  creatures  is  needless,  there  is  as  much  evidence  that 
God  is  evil,  as  there  is  that  he  is  good."  Now,  misery  is  need- 
less or  worse  than  needless,  unless  it  be  subservient  to  good. 
Unless,  therefore,  the  light  of  nature  show  that  the  misery  of 
creatures  is  subservient  to  good,  it  does  not  show  but  that  "  there 
is  as  much  evidence  that  God  is  evil,  as  that  he  is  good."  Our 
author,  in  both  his  pieces,  especially  in  the  first,  supposes,  that  if 
the  misery  in  the  world  he  just,  it  is  needful  too.  If  he  mean 
needful  to  the  general  good,  it  is  not  allowed  that  this  follows 
from  the  justice  of  it,  as  I  have  above  endeavored  to  illustrate. 
The  damnation  of  Paul  would  be  just,  yet  not  needful  to  the 
general  good,  but  totally  inconsistent  with  it.  So  that  if  our  au- 
thor shall  be  able  to  show,  "  that  what  men  suffer  is  just,"  it  will 
not  follow  but  "  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  goodness  of  God." 

Or  if  our  author  meant  to  use  the  words  justice,  merit  and 
demerit,  in  the  large  sense,  comprehending  the  requirement  of 
the  general  good  ;  then,  to  say  that  the  evils  of  life  are  just,  and 
are  merited  by  those  who  suffer  them,  is  the  same  as  to  say,  that 
the  general  good  requires  them,  or  that  they  are  subservient  to 
the  general  good  ;  and  to  argue,  that  they  are  subservient  to  the 
general  good,  because  they  are  merited,  is  the  same  as  to  argue, 
that  they  are  subservient  to  the  general  good,  because  they  are 
subservient  to  the  general  good.  And  it'  is  just  as  difficult  to 
prove,  that  in  this  sense,  the  evils  of  life  are  merited  by  the  sub- 
jects, as  to  prove,  that  they  are  consistent  with  the  general  good, 
or  with  perfect  goodness  in  God. 

Our  author  proceeds,  "  The  question  is,  whether  we  have  not 
evidence  from  the  light  of  nature,  that  God  is  good — As  we  en- 
joy much  good  from  the  hand  of  God,  and  suflfer  no  evil  but  what 
we  deserve,  it  is  evident,  to  us  at  least,  that  God  is  good,  what- 
ever it  may  be  to  other  beings.  Whether  our  consciousness  of 
demerit  be  arbitrary,  or  agreeable  to  the  truth  and  reality  of 
things,  will  make  no  difference  as  to  the  evidence  to  us."  As 
I  have  already  observed,  consciousness  of  demerit,  or  of  right 
or  wrong  in  any  part  of  our  conduct,  is  a  mere  opinion,  that  we 
have  done  right  or  wrong ;  which  opinion  is  commonly  followed 
with  a  sense  of  shame  or  self-approbation.  Now,  this  conscious- 
ness may  be  either  erroneous  and  "  arbitrary,  or  agreeable  to  the 


486       PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

truth  and  reality  of  things."  It  was  erroneous  in  Saul,  wlien  he 
was  conscious  that  he  did  right  in  persecuting  the  church.  It 
was  erroneous  in  Cato  and  Brutus,  when  they  were  conscious 
that  they  did  right  in  killing  themselves.  And  this  opinion,  which 
our  author  acknowledges  may  be  either  "  arbitrary  or  agreeable 
to  the  truth  and  reality  of  things,"  is,  by  concession,  all  the  ground 
in  this  argument,  of  evidence  to  us,  that  God  is  good  ;  and  sure- 
ly the  evidence  arising  from  this  ground,  is  no  proof  at  all.  True, 
we  are,  or  may  be,  conscious,  that  we  deserve  all  the  evil  we  suf- 
fer. So  we  are,  or  may  be,  conscious,  that  we  deserve  all  the 
good  we  receive  from  God,  and  many  have  been  conscious  of  it, 
i.  e.  have  been  fully  of  the  opinion,  that  they  deserved  it,  and 
more  too,  even  eternal  salvation,  insomuch  that  it  would  not  be 
consistent,  in  their  opinion  with  justice  in  God,  to  exclude  them 
from  salvation.  Therefore,  to  such  persons,  conscious  that  they 
deserve  all  the  good,  which  they  receive  from  God,  and  yet  suf- 
fering much  evil  from  his  hand,  the  evidence  that  God  is  evil,  is 
just  as  great  as  the  evidence  to  any  of  us,  for  which  our  author, 
in  this  argument,  pleads,  that  he  is  good.  This  evidence,  I  ac- 
knowledge, exists,  and  is  common  among  men ;  and  if  our  au- 
thor imagine,  that  I  deny  this  evidence,  he  greatly  misunderstands 
me.  The  evidence  which  I  deny,  is  evidence  not  founded  on 
the  opinions  of  men,  "  whether  arbitrary  or  agreeable  to  the 
truth  and  reality  of  things,"  but  founded  on  the  very  truth  and 
reality  of  things. 

To  this  our  author  is  driven  by  the  objection  arising  from  the 
permission  of  sin.  The  objection  is,  that  as  God  has  permitted 
sin,  and  the  light  of  nature  does  not  show,  that  it  is  subservient 
to  the  general  good  ;  therefore,  from  the  light  of  nature  we  can- 
not vindicate  the  divine  goodness,  or  prove  that  God  is  perfectly 
good.  The  answer  of  our  author  is,  that  we  have  no  need  to 
comprehend  the  ultimate  issue  of  moral  evil,  before  we  can  satis- 
fy ourselves  concerning  the  perfect  goodness  of  God  ;  but  as  we 
think,  wliether  arbitrai'ily  or  truly,  that  we  deserve  all  the  evil 
we  suffer ;  therefore  we  have  evidence,  that  God  is  perfectly 
good.     My  reply  is, 

1.  That  though  we  do  think,  that  we  deserve  all  the  evil  we 
suffer  ;  this  opinion,  if  '•'  arbitrary, ^^  and  not  "  agreeable  to  truth," 
is  no  proof  that  we  do  deserve  it. 

2.  That  if  it  were  ever  so  evidently  "  agreeable  to  truth,"  that 
we  deserve  all  the  evil  we  suffer,  this  would  be  no  evidence,  that 
God  inflicts  that  evil  on  us  on  account  of  our  demerit. 

3.  If  it  were  ever  so  evidently  "  agreeable  to  truth,"  that  God 
does  inflict  all  the  natural  evils  of  life  on  us,  on  account  of  our 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  487 

demerit ;  this  would  not  make  it  evident,  that  tlie  general  good 
requires  that  we  suffer  those  evils  ;  or  that  God  inflicts  them,  with 
an  uhimate  view  to  promote  good. 

4.  If  it  were  ever  so  evident,  that  since  sin  exists  in  the  world, 
the  general  good  requires,  that  it  be  punished  with  all  the  natural 
evils  of  life  ;  this  would  be  no  proof,  that  sin  itself  is  subservient 
to  the  general  good  ;  and  that  God  permitted  it  from  this  motive. 
So  that  our  author,  in  order  to  maintain  his  argument,  must  prove, 
from  the  light  of  nature, 

1.  That  it  is  an  opinion  not  "arbitrary,^'  but  "agreeable  to 
the  truth  and  reality  of  things,"  that  we  deserve  all  the  natural 
evils  of  life. 

2.  That  God  inflicts  those  evils,  not  on  account  of  our  good 
conduct,  but  on  account  of  our  demerit. 

3.  That  the  general  good  is  subserved  by  our  suffering  those 
evils ;  and  that  God  inflicts  them  with  a  design  to  promote  the 
general  good. 

4.  That  the  existence  of  sin  in  the  world,  is  subservient  to  the 
general  good  ;  and  that  God  permitted  it  from  this  motive. 

Our  author  thinks  the  circumstance,  "  that  God  has  annexed 
pain  to  vicious,  and  pleasure  to  virtuous  actions,  proves  that  God 
is  good,  if  there  be  nothing  to  rebut  the  evidence — and  as  the 
light  of  nature  is  sufficient  to  show,  that  all  the  attributes  of  the 
Deity  are  infinite,  of  course  it  follows,  that  he  is  infinitely  good." 
On  this  I  observe, 

1.  That  the  pleasure  implied  in  many  virtuous  actions  and 
emotions,  is  necessarily  connected  with  those  actions  and  emo- 
tions, and  so  far  as  appears,  could  not  have  been  separated  from 
them,  but  would  have  been  the  same  on  the  atheistic  hypothesis. 
For  example,  there  is  a  pleasure  in  benevolence,  in  complacency 
in  virtue,  in  a  virtuous  character,  in  the  perfect  moral  law,  in 
gratitude,  in  confidence  in  a  faithful  friend,  in  doing  what  we  are 
conscious  is  our  duty,  as  justice,  beneficence,  etc.  Therefore,  if 
this  pleasure  be  not  annexed  to  virtue,  by  the  constitution  of  God, 
but  would  be  the  same  if  there  were  no  God,  and  we  existed  in 
a  social  state,  it  is  no  proof  of  the  divine  goodness. 

2.  There  are  many  pains  attendant  on  virtue ;  as  on  benevo- 
lence to  the  distressed  and  dying,  whom  we  cannot  relieve ;  on 
repentance,  always  attended  with  remorse  at  least  in  this  world  ;  on 
self-denial,  confessing  our  faults  one  to  another,  admonishing  and 
reproving  one  another ;  on  that  constant  watchfulness,  which,  in 
the  present  state,  is  necessary  to  be  rriaintained  against  sin  and 
temptation,  etc.  If,  therefore,  the  pleasure  attendant  on  virtue, 
be  an  evidence  of  the  goodness  of  God,  I  ask  whether  that  evi- 


488      PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

dence  be  not  at  all  ''  rebutted"  by  the  pain  attendant  on  virtue ; 
and  whether,  if  the  pleasure  attendant  on  virtue  prove  God  to  be 
good,  the  pain  attendant  on  it  do  not  prove  him  to  be  evil. 

3.  There  is  pleasure  "  in  fulfilling  the  desires  of  the  flesh  and 
of  the  mind  ;"  in  pride  ;  in  pursuing  and  acquiring  the  objects  of 
ambition  and  worldliness.  Did  not  Nebuchadnezzar  feel  plea- 
sure, when  he  said,  "  Is  not  this  great  Babylon,  that  I  have  built 
for  the  house  of  my  kingdom,  by  the  might  of  my  power,  and  for 
the  honor  of  my  majesty  ?"  Did  not  Belshazzar  feel  pleasure, 
when  he,  his  princes,  his  wives  and  concubines,  triumphantly 
drank  wine  out  of  the  golden  vessels  taken  from  the  temple  in 
Jerusalem  ?  Did  not  the  old  Roman  conquerors  enjoy  pleasure, 
when  they  entered  the  city  in  triumph,  leading  in  chains  and  in 
the  most  contemptuous  and  insulting  manner,  the  generals  and 
kings  whom  they  had  conquered  ?  I  need  not  proceed.  A  vol- 
ume might  be  filled  with  instances,  in  which  the  depraved  heart 
of  man  is  gratified  by  sin  and  vice. 

But  says  our  author,  "  It  may  be  reasonably  doubted,  whether 
pleasure  is,  in  any  case,  annexed  to  vice  as  such.  The  epicure 
enjoys  the  pleasure  of  eating  and  drinking  in  common  with  the 
temperate — but  the  pleasures  of  the  vicious  are  not  equally 
genuine  and  sincere  with  those  of  the  virtuous,  and  are  generally 
attended  with  pain  from  remorse — the  sweetness  of  revenge — is 
the  sweetness  of  resting  from  torment." 

What  our  author  means  by  "  pleasure  annexed  to  vice  as  such,'^ 
is  not  certain.  Does  he  mean,  that  when  pride  is  gratified,  it  is 
not  gratified  as  pride,  but  as  humility  1  That  when  malice  and 
avarice  are  gratified,  they  are  gratified  not  as  they  are,  malice  and 
avarice,  but  as  they  are  benevolence,  and  "  contentment  with 
such  things  as  we  have  ?"  So  with  regard  to  ambition,  inordinate 
self-love,  etc.  If  he  mean,  that  the  pleasure  attached  to  the  gra- 
tification of  pride,  malice,  etc.  is  not  a  vicious,  but  a  virtuous  emo- 
tion, this  is  denied,  and  must  be  clearly  proved,  before  it  can  be 
admitted.  Our  author  admits  that  "  the  epicure  enjoys  the  plea- 
sure of  eating  and  drinking,"  in  his  epicurean  manner,  "  in  com- 
mon with  the  temperate."  This  is  the  very  objection  which  had 
been  urged  against  our  author's  principle,  and  proves,  that  so  far 
at  least  all  things  come  alike  to  all ;  and  that  the  author  of  na- 
ture has  so  far  borne  no  testimony  in  favor  of  temperance.  If 
what  our  author  means  by  "  pleasure  annexed  to  vice  as  such,'^ 
be,  that  the  man  of  vice,  for  instance,  the  epicure,  does  not  alone 
enjoy  pleasure  in  his  intemperate  course ;  but  the  man  of  virtue 
enjoys  the  same  pleasure  in  his  temperance  ;  then  his  observation 
may  be  retorted  ;  thus,  pleasure  is  not  annexed  to  virtue  as  such, 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  489 

but  is  common  to  the  temperate  and  the  epicure.  So  that  this 
argument  is  just  as  forcible  against  our  author's  principle  as  in 
favor  of  it. 

"  But,"  says  our  author,  "  tlie  pleasures  of  the  vicious  are  not 
equally  genuine  and  sincere  with  those  of  the  virtuous."  This 
is  shifting  the  ground  of  argument,  and  granting  that  there  are 
some  j)leasurcs  annexed  to  vice;  but  not  so  great  as  those  an- 
nexed to  virtue  ;  and  the  argument  stands  thus,  God  has  annexed 
more  pleasure  to  virtue,  than  he  has  to  vice ;  therefore,  he  is  a 
perfect  friend  to  virtue,  and  perfect  enemy  to  vice.  The  argu- 
ment is  much  the  same  with  that  which  is  commonly  used  by  au- 
thors, to  prove,  from  the  light  of  nature,  the  moral  perfection  of 
God,  viz.  that  there  is  more  happiness  in  the  world  than  there  is 
misery  ;  therefore  God  is  perfectly  good.  Tiiis  argument,  in  any 
other  case,  would  not  be  admitted  to  have  the  least  weight ;  as 
in  this  case,  a  father  does  good  to  his  children  more  frequently, 
or  to  a  greater  degree,  than  he  teazes  and  torments  them  ;  there- 
fore he  is  a  perfectly  good  parent. 

"  The  pleasures  of  the  vicious  are  attended  with  pain  from  re- 
morse." So  the  pleasures  of  the  virtuous  are  attended  with  pain 
from  disappointment,  from  not  being  able  to  accomplish  their  be- 
nevolent wishes,  and  from  various  other  causes.  And  as  to  re- 
morse, it  proceeds  from  the  opinion  which  a  man  entertains  of 
the  viciousness  of  his  own  conduct  or  temper ;  and  would,  for 
aught  appears,  be  the  same  on  the  atheistic  hypothesis. 

"The  sweetness  of  revenge,"  says  our  author,  "is  the  sweet- 
ness of  resting  from  torment."  Tiie  same  may  be  said  of  the 
gratification  of  most  or  all  our  strong  desires,  as  compassion  to  the 
distressed,  the  natural  affection  of  parents  to  their  children,  etc. 
And  what  follows  ?  Surely  not  that  there  is  no  pleasure  in  the 
gratification  of  those  desires ;  nor  that  all  the  pleasure  is  a  mere 
resting  from  torment.  And  this  is  as  true  of  revenge  as  of  any 
of  them. 

4.  That  "  the  light  of  nature  is  sufficient  to  show,  that  all  at- 
tributes of  the  Deity  are  infinite,"  supposing  goodness  is  one  of 
them,  is  not  granted.  Suppose  it  could  be  proved  by  the  light  of 
nature,  that  goodness  in  a  greater  or  less  degree,  does  exist  in  the 
Deity  ;  how  does  it  follow,  that  this  goodness  is  perfect  and  infi- 
nite ?  I  am  sensible  that  this  has  been  frequently  taken  for  grant- 
ed, but  without  w'arrant.  We,  therefore,  wait  for  proof.  If  it 
be  said,  that  if  God  be  partly  good  and  partly  evil,  he  must  be 
changeable  ;  this  does  not  follow.  He  will  indeed,  on  this  hy- 
pothesis, sometimes  do  good  and  sometimes  evil.  But  the  good 
which  he  does  he  may  liave  unchangeably  determined  to  do ;  and 

Vol.  II.  42 


490        PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

SO  with  regard  to  the  evil.  He  sometimes  sends  fair  weather,  and 
sometimes  foul ;  but  is  he  therefore  changeable  ?  If  it  should  be 
further  said,  that  if  God  be  partly  good  and  partly  evil,  there 
would  be  a  struggle  between  the  opposite  principles  of  good  and 
evil,  till  one  should  become  superior,  and  then  this  would  over- 
come and  eradicate  the  other  :  I  answer,  1.  There  is  no  neces- 
sity of  supposing  that  either  principal  would  become  superior. 
They  might  be  balanced.  2.  If  one  were  superior,  it  would  not 
follow  that  it  would  eradicate  the  other.  Doubtless  of  the  oppo- 
site principles  of  sin  and  holiness,  one  has  been  superior  in  many 
men  ;  yet  it  has  not  therefore,  eradicated  the  opposite.  And  that 
it  would  produce  such  an  effect  in  the  Deity,  in  the  case  now  sup- 
posed, we  have  a  right  to  demand  evidence. 

5.  This  whole  argument,  on  which  I  have  been  remarking, 
may  be  retorted.  The  argument  is  this  :  "  that  God  has  annex- 
ed pain  to  vicious,  and  pleasure  to  virtuous  actions,  proves  that 
God  is  good,  if  there  be  nothing  to  rebut  the  evidence — and  as 
the  light  of  nature  is  sufficient  to  show,  that  all  attributes  of  the 
Deity  are  infinite,  of  course  it  follows,  that  he  is  infinitely  good.'^ 
It  may  be  retorted  thus  :  that  God  has  annexed  pain  to  virtuous, 
and  pleasure  to  vicious  actions,  proves  that  God  is  evil,  if  there 
is  nothing  to  rebut  the  evidence — and  as  the  light  of  nature  is 
sufficient  to  show  that  all  attributes  of  the  Deity  are  infinite,  of 
course  it  follows,  that  he  is  infinitely  evil. 

Our  author,  in  this,  as  well  as  in  his  first  piece,  argues  the  good- 
ness of  God  from  the  goodness  of  the  laws  of  nature  ;  those 
laws  by  which  the  natural  world  is  governed.  If  he  mean  that 
some  of  those  laws  are  good,  as  that  by  which  light  is  produced  ; 
it  does  not  prove  the  point  in  dispute.  That  some  of  the  laws  of  the 
natural  world  are  good,  no  more  proves,  that  God  is  perfectly  good; 
than  the  same  thing  is  proved  by  God's  sometimes  doing  good. 
An  objector  may  say,  be  it  so,  that  God  sometimes  does  good, 
and  has  estabhshed  some  good  laws  ;  if  he  sometimes  do  evil  and 
have  established  some  laws  which  are  evil,  we  are  left  at  a  loss 
concerning  his  character,  and  may  as  well  argue  from  the  evil 
which  he  does,  and  from  the  evil  laws  which  he  has  established, 
that  his  character  is  evil,  as  from  the  good  which  he  does,  and 
from  the  good  laws  that  he  has  established,  that  his  character  is  good. 
Nor  is  there  any  way,  I  conceive,  to  answer  this  objection,  but  by 
showing  that  he  always  does  good  only,  and  that  all  his  laws  are 
good.  If,  therefore,  in  this  argument,  our  author  mean  that  all 
the  laws  of  nature  are  entirely  good  ;  if  this  were  evident  of  it- 
self, or  were  proved,  it  would  go  far  toward  the  establishment  of 
the  point  in  question.     But  it  is  not  allowed  to  be  self-evident, 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  491 

nor  does  our  author  pretend  that  he  lias  proved  it ;  but  seems  to 
allow,  that  "  he  has  taken  it  for  granted  as  a  medium  of  proof," 
that  God  is  good.  However,  as  it  is  not  granted,  but  is  eijually 
disputed,  as  that  God  is  good  ;  to  take  it  for  granted,  is  as  im- 
proper, as  to  take  for  granted,  that  God  is  good.  Indeed,  it 
amounts  to  the  same  thing.  The  laws  of  nature  arc  the  laws  of 
providence,  the  laws  by  which  God  governs  the  world.  And  if 
those  laws  be  good,  all  that  God  does  in  the  course  of  common 
providence  is  good.  If  this  be  granted,  no  doubt  it  will  be  grant- 
ed that  God  is  good.  Therefore,  taking  for  granted  what  our 
author  calls  his  medium  of  proof,  is  the  same  as  to  take  for  grant- 
ed the  very  thing  to  be  proved  thereby. 

Our  author  asserts,  that  "  our  circumstances"  in  this  world, 
''  are  suited  to  our  character  and  state."  If  it  were  proved,  that 
our  circumstances  are  so  suited  to  our  character  and  state,  as  to 
subserve  the  good  of  the  general  system,  it  would  doubdess  be  a 
main  step  toward  the  establishment  of  the  goodness  of  God.  But 
without  proof,  this  cannot  be  admitted  ;  and  it  requires  the  same 
proof  as  the  divine  goodness  does. 

I  come  at  length  to  the  argument  from  Rom.  1:  18 — 21,  "  The 
wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  ungodliness  and 
unrighteousness  of  men,  who  hold  the  truth  in  unrighteousness. 
Because  that  which  may  be  known  of  God,  is  manifest  in  them, 
for  God  hath  showed  it  unto  them.  For  the  invisible  things  of 
him  from  the  creation  of  the  world,  are  clearly  seen,  being  under- 
stood by  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal  power  and 
Godhead  ;  so  that  they  are  without  excuse.  Because  when  they 
knew  God,  they  glorified  him  not  as  God,  neither  were  thankful." 
In  my  former  piece,  I  supposed  it  plain,  from  the  form  of  expres- 
sion, "  The  invisible  things  are  clearly  seen,"  that  the  apostle  is 
declaring  a  matter  of  fact,  that  those  invisible  things  were  actually 
seen,  and  not  merely  that  they  were  so  far  exhibited,  that  the 
knowledge  of  them  might  be  traced  out.  This  I  think  is  further 
evident  by  several  expressions  of  the  context ;  as,  "  who  hold 
the  truth  in  unrighteousness ;"  "  that  which  may  be  known  of 
God,  is  manifest  in  them,  for  God  hath  showed  it  unto  them  ;" 
"  when  they  knew  God."  Verse  28,  "  As  they  did  not  like  to 
retain  God  in  their  knowledge."  Verse  32,  "  Who  knowing  the 
judgment  of  God."  How  our  author  will  reconcile  these  forms 
of  expression  with  his  construction,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive. 
According  to  that  construction,  they  must  mean  merely,  "  Are 
capable  of  being  clearly  seen ;"  "  who  7nay  possibly  hold  the 
truth  in  unrighteousness  ;"  "  That  which  may  be  known  of  God, 
may  be   manifest  in  them  ;  for  God  hath  so  far  showed  it  to 


492        PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

thorn,  that  it  may  he  known  by  them ;  (which  is  a  mere  identi- 
cal proposition.)  "  When  they  were  capable  of  knowing  God, 
they  glorified  him  not  as  God  ;"  "  As  they  did  not  like  to  retain 
God  in  ihew  possible  knowledge  ;"  "  Who  having  a  capacity  of 
knowing  the  judgment  of  God." 

However,  supposing  it  were  made  plain,  that  the  apostle  meant 
no  more  than  that  the  heathen,  by  careful  attention  and  study, 
might  trace  out  the  knowledge  of  God's  eternal  power  and  God- 
head ;  still  two  questions  material  to  this  discussion,  remain  to  be 
answered.  The  first  is,  what  are  we  to  understand  by  eternal 
power  and  Godhead  ?  The  second  is,  supposing  it  to  be  made 
out,  that  eternal  power  and  Godhead  comprehended  the  divine 
moral  perfections,  by  what  means  were  the  heathen  capable  of 
attaining  to  the  knowledge  of  them  ?  By  the  bare  light  of  na- 
ture ?     Or  by  that  with  the  aid  of  Revelation  ? 

The  first  question  is,  What  are  we  to  understand  by  eternal 
power  and  Godhead  ?  Our  author  contends,  that  they  must  in- 
clude moral  perfection,  or  the  heathen  were  not  under  obliga- 
tion to  glorify  God  as  God,  or  to  be  thankful.  But  if  they,  by 
the  light  of  nature,  discovered,  that  God  alone  was  a  being  of  eter- 
nal power,  and  absolute  supremacy,  were  they  not  under  obligation 
to  acknowledge,  in  the  most  explicit  and  public  manner,  this  truth, 
and  to  treat  God  accordingly  ?  of  course,  to  renounce  the  worship 
of  all  those  Gods,  to  whose  worship  they  had  hitherto  devoted 
themselves,  and  thenceforward,  to  worship  the  Lord  alone  ?  And 
if  they  were  ignorant  of  the  moral  perfection  of  God,  they  would 
surely  have  had,  at  least  as  good  reason  to  impute  moral  perfections 
to  him,  as  to  any  of  those  Gods  whom  they  did  worship.  If  they 
had  so  acted,  they  would  no  longer  have  "  changed  the  glory  of 
the  incorruptible  God,  into  an  image  made  like  to  corruptible 
man,  and  to  birds,  and  four-footed  beasts  and  creeping  things  ;" 
but  would,  in  some  measure,  at  least  have  "  glorified  God  as  God," 
and  would  have  been  "  thankful"  for  all  the  good  which  they  re- 
ceived from  God  ;  and  that  whether  they  were  settled  in  their 
belief  of  his  absolute  moral  perfection  or  not.  Do  we  not  all 
feel  our  obligation  to  be  thankful  for  benefits  received  from  men, 
not  only  concerning  whom  we  doubt  whether  they  possess  moral 
perfection,  but  whom  we  know  to  be  destitute  of  it  ? 

Our  author  tells  us,  "The  original  Greek  word,  translated 
Godhead,  seems  to  express  all  that  belongs  to  the  divine  nature." 
It  may  seem  so  to  some,  but  we  wish  for  proof.  He  adds,  "  It  is 
certainly  used  in  this  extensive  sense,  in  Col.  2:  9."  It  is  to  be 
presumed  he  did  not  consult  "  the  original  Greek,"  or  he  would 
liave  seen,  that  the  same  word  is  not  used  in  Col.  2:  9.     If  Wil- 


FROM  THE  LIGHT  OF  NATURE.  493 

liams^  Concordance  may  be  depended  on,  Rom.  1:  20,  is  the 
only  place  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  it  occurs.  By  Trom- 
mius'  Concordance,  it  appears  not  to  be  used  at  all  in  the  Septua- 
gint ;  but  it  occurs  once  in  the  Apocrypha,  in  Wisd.  IS:  9,  "  The 
righteous  children  of  good  men — made  a  holy  law,"  rrjg  ^eio- 
Tijiog  i'6f.ioi'^  a  law  of  the  Godhead.  Whether  in  this  passage  it 
include  moral  perfection  no  more  appears,  than  from  Rom.  1:  20. 
It  may  mean  a  holy  law,  or  a  law  of  supreme  authority,  as  all  the 
laws  of  God  are. 

Our  author  supposes  the  word  power,  in  this  text,  summarily 
expresses  the  natural  perfections  of  God  ;  and  that  therefore, 
Godhead  "  is  intended  to  include  his  moral  perfections  ;  other- 
wise the  sense  is  not  at  all  advanced  by  it."  There  is  no  appa- 
rent evidence,  that  the  word  power  was  intended  to  express  all 
the  natural  perfections  of  God.  Knowledge  or  omniscience,  is 
a  distinct  perfection  from  power,  and  not  necessarily  expressed 
by  that  word.  Nay,  the  word  power,  as  used  here,  does  not  ne- 
cessarily imply  omnipotence.  Therefore,  if  Godhead  be  under- 
stood to  mean  the  divine  independence,  supremacy,  omniscience 
and  sovereignty,  the  sense  is  advanced  by  it.  But  if  the  words 
eternal  power  and  Godhead,  were  entirely  synonymous,  it  would 
be  a  poor  ground  for  the  argument,  which  our  author  attempts  to 
build  upon  it.  Instances  of  synonymous  words  frequently  occur 
in  most  books,  and  especially  in  the  scriptures. 

The  second  question  mentioned  above,  is,  supposing  it  certain, 
that  eternal  power  and  Godhead  do  comprehend  the  moral  per- 
fections ;  by  what  means  were  the  heathen  capable  of  attaining 
to  the  knowledge  of  them  ?  By  the  bare  light  of  nature  ?  Or  by 
that  with  the  aid  of  revelation,  either  handed  down  from  primi- 
tive times,  or  derived  from  the  Jews,  or  both  ?  That  they  were 
capable  of  attaining  to  that  knowledge  in  the  latter  way,  I  allow, 
and  suppose  that  Rom.  1:  20,  may  be  fairly  understood  in  this 
sense.  Our  author  supposes  it  cannot  be  fairly  understood  in 
this  sense,  and  argues  from  that  expression,  "  being  understood 
by  the  things  that  are  made."  My  answer  to  this  is,  1.  That 
vooi'fifpu,  translated  understood,  does  not  necessarily  or  properly 
mean,  that,  but  minded,  thought  of,  or  considered.  2.  That  if  it 
can  be  proved,  that  voovfiffu,  in  this  text,  means  understood,  still 
the  text  may  mean,  not  that  the  eternal  power  and  Godhead  are 
found  out,  and  in  that  sense  understood  by  the  things  that  are 
made  ;  but  that  being  made  known  by  revelation,  they  are  fur- 
ther illustrated,  and  better  understood,  by  a  contemplation  of  the 
works  of  creation  and  providence,  and  by  comparing  the  light  of 
nature  with  the  light  of  revelation. 

42* 


494       PROOF  OF  THE  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD 

1.  The  meaning  of  voovi-ievu  is  the  object  of  inquiry.  All  the 
instances,  in  which  the  verb  votoi,  in  any  of  its  forms,  occurs  in 
the  New  Testament,  are  the  following:  Matt.  15:  17,  "Do  ye 
not  yet  understand,  that  whatsoever  entereth  into  the  mouth, 
goeth  into  the  belly  ?"  etc.  It  is  manifest,  that  here  it  may  be 
rendered,  consider,  attend  to,  reflect.  It  is  rendered  by  Monta- 
nus,  consideratis,  consider.  Matt.  16:  9,  "  Do  ye  not  yet  mw- 
derstand  neither  remember  the  five  loaves?"  etc.  and,  v.  11, 
"  How  is  it,  that  ye  do  not  understand,  that  I  spake  it  not  to 
you  concerning  bread  ?"  In  both  these  texts,  Beza  renders  it  by 
animadvertitis,  consider.  Matt.  24:  15,  '•'  Whoso  readeth,  let 
him  understand ;"  rendered  by  Beza,  animadvertat,  let  him  at- 
tend;  by  Tremellius,  consideret,  let  him  consider.  Mark  7:  18, 
"  Do  ye  not  perceive  ?"  rendered  by  Montanus,  consideratis, 
consider.  Chap.  8:  1 7,  •'  Perceive  ye  not  yet  ?"  rendered  by 
Beza,  animum  advertitis,  reflect  or  consider.  Chap.  13:  14,  "  Let 
him  that  readeth  understand ;"  rendered  by  Beza,  animadver- 
tat, consider  ;  the  same  by  Tremellius.  Indeed,  it  must  be  so 
explained,  however  it  is  rendered.  For  understanding,  in  the 
strict  sense,  is  not  a  voluntary  act,  and  therefore,  not  proper  mat- 
ter of  command  or  exhortation.  John  12:  40,  "  Nov  understand 
with  their  heart."  This  is  the  first  instance,  in  which  the  fore- 
mentioned  noted  translators  of  the  New  Testament,  Beza.  Tre- 
mellius, and  Montanus,  agree  in  rendering  the  word  in  question, 
intelligant ,  understand.  The  next  passage  in  which  vo^o)  occurs, 
is  Rom.  1:  20,  the  text  now  under  consideration.  Although  in 
his  translation,  Beza  renders  voov^nvu  intellecta,  understood ; 
yet  Pool,  in  his  synopsis,  says,  that  he  explains  it  by  animadver- 
sa,  observed,  referring  doubtless  to  Beza's  other  works,  which  I 
do  not  possess.  According  to  Pool,  Flaccius  Illyricus,  and  Cas- 
talio,  render  it  dum  considerantur,  while  the  things  that  are  made, 
are  considered.  Eph.  3:  4,  "  Ye  may  understand  my  knowledge." 
According  to  Pool,  Beza  here  explains  the  word  by  perpendere, 
consider,  or  ponder  ;  and  Castalio,  animadvertere,  consider.  In 
the  same  chapter,  v.  20,  "  Now  to  him  that  is  able  to  do  ex- 
ceeding abundantly  above  all  that  we  ask  or  think."  Our  author 
is  of  the  opinion,  that  voovf-teva  here  might  have  been  as  well 
rendered  understand.  But  surely  he  did  not  consider,  that  the 
apostle  is  here  representing  the  omnipotence  of  God  ;  and  as  we 
understand  but  very  few  things,  and  most  of  all  those  few,  in  a 
very  imperfect  degree  ;  to  say  that  God  is  able  to  do  above  all 
that  we  understand,  is  an  ascription  of  no  great  power  or  glory. 
But  to  be  able  to  do  above  all  that  we  are  able  to  think  or  ima- 
gine, is  doubtless  peculiar  to  the  divine  omnipotence.     Besides, 


PROM  THE  LIGHT  OP  NATURE.  495 

We  can  ask  for  many  things  which  we  do  not  understand.  There- 
fore, to  say  that  God  can  do  above  what  we  can  ask  or  under- 
stand,  is  a  down-hill  climax,  not  to  be  ascribed  to  the  apostle 
Paul.  Doubtless,  our  translators  have,  in  this  instance,  rendered 
the  word  properly.  Beza,  in  this  place,  renders  it  mente  conci- 
pimus,  imagine.  Tremellius  renders  it  cogitamus,  think.  Mon- 
tanus  translates  it  into  the  same  words  with  Beza.  1  Tim.  1:  7, 
"  Desiring  to  be  teachers  of  tlie  law,  understanding  neither  what 
they  say,  or  whereof  they  affirm."  I  have  no  objection  to  the 
translation  in  this  instance.  Yet  there  is  no  necessity  of  this 
translation.  It  docs  not  appear,  but  that  the  sense  of  the  apos- 
tle was,  considej'ing  neither  what  they  say,  nor  whereof  they  af- 
firm. They  were  such  loose,  negligent  teachers,  that  they  not 
only  did  not  understand,  but  did  not  study  or  consider  their 
subject.  They  resembled  many  teachers  of  the  present  day.  2 
Tim.  2:  1,  "  Consider  what  I  say  ;  and  the  Lord  give  thee  un- 
derstanding in  all  things."  Here  it  is  translated  consider,  the 
very  word  by  which  I  propose  to  have  it  translated  in  Rom.  1:  20. 
By  Beza,  and  Tremellius,  it  is  rendered  considera,  consider. 
According  to  Pool,  Grotius  renders  it  attende,  attend  to.  Eras- 
mus, Flaccius  Illyricus,  and  the  Tigurine  version  render  it  cogita, 
think  of .  ^cuhetus  expresses  h  by  per'pende,  ponder.  Heb.  11: 
3,  "  Through  faith  we  understand  that  the  worlds  were  framed 
by  the  word  of  God."  I  have  no  objection  to  our  author's  avail- 
ing himself  of  this  text  to  prove,  that  sometimes  votw  signifies  to 
understand.  Thus  I  have  examined  every  passage  in  the  New 
Testament,  in  vvhicii  that  verb  in  any  form  is  used  ;  and  I  appeal 
to  the  reader,  whether  it  do  necessarily  or  most  commonly  signi- 
fy to  understand.  Not  voho,  but  owh^^a  is  the  Greek  word  pro- 
perly correspondent  to  the  English  understand. 

I  have  been  thus  particular  in  my  attention  to  the  meaning  of 
a  word,  because  it  is  so  important  to  our  author's  system,  and  be- 
cause he  "  thinks  it  clear,  that  in  the  passage  in  question,  it  is 
translated  in  the  most  usual  and  proper  sense."  If  the  most  usual 
and  proper  sense  of  it  were  understand ;  still  in  Rom  1:  20,  it 
might  be  used  in  a  sense  less  usual  and  proper.  So  that  that  text 
would  not  even  on  the  hypothesis  now  made,  be  decisive  of  the 
main  question  now  in  discussion.  But  since,  by  far  the  greater 
part  of  the  texts  in  which  the  word  is  used,  are  manifestly  capable 
of  a  sense  different  from  that  insisted  on  by  our  author,  and  are 
actually  understood  in  a  different  sense,  by  some  of  the  most  noted 
translators  and  critics  of  the  New  Testament,  and  greatest  adepts 
in  the  Greek  language;  may  I  not  fairly  conclude,  that  Rom.  1: 
20  decides  nothing  concerning  the  proof  of  the  moral  perfections 


496  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  OF  GOD. 

of  God,  from  the  bare  light  of  nature.  Especially  when  it  is 
considered, 

2.  That  if  it  can  be  proved,  that  voov^ieva  in  Rom.  1:  20, 
means  understood ;  still  the  text  may  mean  not  that  the  eternal 
power  and  Godhead  are  found  out,  and  in  that  sense  understood 
by  the  things  that  are  made  ;  but  that  they  being  made  known  by 
revelation,  are  further  illustrated  and  more  fully  understood  by 
comparing  the  light  of  revelation  with  the  works  of  creation  and 
providence.  When  once  God's  natural  and  moral  perfections 
are  revealed,  the  works  of  creation  and  providence  will  happily 
give  more  enlarged  and  striking  views  of  those  perfections,  than 
might  arise  from  mere  revelation,  especially  from  the  imperfect 
revelation,  which  the  heathen  world  could  derive,  either  from  their 
progenitors  or  from  the  Jews.  So  that  if  our  author  can  estab- 
lish his  criticism  on  voov(.iiva^  he  would  not  gain  the  main  ques- 
tion. In  order  to  this  he  must  prove,  that  "  being  understood  by 
the  things  that  are  made,"  means,  that  the  eternal  power  and 
Godhead,  now  supposed  to  include  the  moral  perfections,  can  be 
found  out,  as  well  as  more  thoroughly  understood  by  the  things 
that  are  made. 

If  the  ancient  heathen  were,  by  the  bare  light  of  nature,  capa- 
ble of  finding  out  and  proving  the  moral  perfections  of  God, 
doubtless,  discerning  and  good  men,  such  as  our  author  is  ac- 
knowledged to  be,  are  now  capable  of  proving  them  from  the 
same  source  of  information.  If,  therefore,  he  or  any  other  man 
will  from  this  source,  trace  out  satisfactory  evidence  of  those  per- 
fections, and  exhibit  it  to  the  world,  the  candid  will  doubtless  re- 
ceive it ;  and  the  need  of  further  disputation  concerning  the  mean- 
ing of  Rom.  1:  20,  will  be  precluded.  But  if  neither  our  author 
nor  any  other  man  can  from  the  light  of  nature,  point  out  any 
tolerable  proof  of  the  moral  perfections  of  God,  I  submit  it  to  the 
reader,  whether  this  be  not  a  ground  of  strong  presumption,  that 
our  author  has  mistaken  the  sense  of  Rom.  1:  20,  especially  since 
it  is  fairly  and  easily  capable  of  a  very  different  construction. 

I  hope,  that  when  our  author  shall  write  again,  he  will  not  re- 
present me  to  be  inconsistent  with  myself,  merely  because,  upon 
different  suppositions,  I  have  given  different  constructions  of  Rom. 
1:  20.  Though  some  of  those  suppositions  do  mutually  exclude 
each  other,  and  are  incapable  of  coexistence  ;  yet  it  is  conceived, 
that  there  is  no  inconsistence  in  any  of  them  taken  separately  ; 
and  each  one  is  supposed  to  exist  no  otherwise  than  separately. 


IMIVTATERIALITY  OF  THE   HUMAN  SOUL.  497 


IMMATERIALITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SOUL. 

The  soul  is  an  immaterial  substance,  and  therefore  naturally 
immortal,  i.  e.  not  capable  o(  destruction,  by  a  dissolution  of  parts, 
as  bodies  are. 

I  acknowled<j;G  that  this  consideration  is  not  decisive  in  favor 
of  the  immortahty  of  the  soul ;  yet  all  opposersof  the  immortality, 
oppose  also  the  immateriality  of  it ;  and  thus  show,  that  they 
consider  the  immateriality  of  it  as  an  obstacle  in  their  way,  which 
it  concerns  them  to  remove. 

As  they  assert  the  soul  to  be  a  material  substance,  it  seems 
proper  to  consider — their  ideas  of  matter,  and  of  the  soul — and 
their  arguments  to  disprove  its  immateriality. 

1.  I  shall  briefly  consider  their  ideas  of  matter,  and  of  the 
soul. 

It  is  not  strange,  that  on  these  subjects  they  should  differ  among 
themseU'es  ;  and  it  is  not  worth  while  to  follow,  or  even  relate 
the  opinions  of  all  the  opposers  of  the  immateriality  of  the  soul. 
It  will  be  sufficient,  if  I  consider  that  opinion,  which,  in  modern 
time,  is  most  noted,  and  periiaps  has  been  most  labored  and  sup- 
ported by  the  most  learned  arguments. 

Matter  is  observed  to  be  "  an  extended  substance,  possessed 
of  certain  powers  of  attraction  and  repulsion  ;"*  and  it  is  said, 
"  take  away  attraction  and  repulsion,  and  matter  vanishes.'-f 
Solidity  or  impenetrability  is  denied  to  belong  to  matter,  which 
is  further  defined  to  be  "  a  compasses  of  centres  of  attraction  and 
repulsion."  If  then  matter  think,  reflect,  reason,  etc.  and  if,  as 
it  is  said,  it  consist  of  mere  centres  of  attraction  and  repulsion, 
then  those  centres,  void  of  all  solidity,  must  think,  reason,  etc. 

Matter,  as  just  now  observed,  is  said  to  be  an  extended  sub- 
stance ;  and  a  compact  body  is  defined  to  be  a  compasses  of  cen- 
tres of  attraction  and  repulsion.  At  the  same  time  it  is  asserted, 
that  a  single  one  of  those  centres  is  indivisible,  and  does  not  oc- 
cupy any  portion  of  space. J  If  so,  then  any  number  of  those 
centres,  or  any  compasses  of  them,  can  occupy  no  space. 

It  is  said  that  matter  possesses  certain  powers  of  attraction  and 
repulsion.  Now,  what  possesses  these  powers?  Nothing  solid, 
nothing  extended  ;  but  an  uncxtended  centre,  or  mathematical 
point ;  or  at  the  most  a  compasses  of  such  points.  These  points 
are  the  mere  centres  to,  and  from  which  the  divine  agency  is  di- 
rected in  what  this  scheme  calls  attraction  and  repulsion  ;  for  it 

*  Corrcspoudence  between  Price  and  Priestly,  p.  16. 
t  Ibid.  p.  245.  t  Ibid.  p.  249. 


498  IMMATERIALITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SOUL. 

is  allowed,  that  attraction  and  repulsion  are  no  actions  of  matter, 
but  of  some  cause  extrinsic  to  matter,  i.  e.  of  the  Deity.  It  is 
expressly  holden,  "  that  the  divine  being,  and  his  energy,  are  ab- 
solutely necessary  to  that  of  every  other  being  ;"  that  "  every 
thing  is  the  divine  power,"  (I  suppose  the  meaning  is  the  effect 
of  the  divine  power)  and  "  all  action  is  tlie  [effect  of  the]  action 
of  God  ;"  that  "  he  does  everything  ;"*  that  "  his  power  is  the 
very  life  and  soul  of  everything  that  exists  ;  and  that,  strictly 
speaking,  without  him,  we  are,  as  well  as  can  do,  nothing."  The 
whole  of  matter,  therefore,  according  to  this  scheme,  is  the  di- 
vine agency,  drawing  or  driving  certain  mathematical  points,  to 
or  from  certain  other  mathematical  points. 

Now,  if  this  matter  think  and  reason,  love  and  hate,  what  is  it 
belonging  to  it,  that  thinks,  reasons,  etc.  ?  It  must  be  either 
these  mathematical  points,  or  the  divine  agency  exerted  in  at- 
traction and  repulsion.  But  it  is  to  be  presumed,  that  mere 
mathematical  points  do  not  think,  reason,  etc.  because,  on  that 
supposition,  not  only  would  all  matter  think,  which  is  not  pre- 
tended, but  all  space,  and  every  mathematical  point  in  the  uni- 
verse would  think. 

Nor  will  it  be  pretended,  that  the  divine  agency,  exerted  in  at- 
traction and  repulsion,  thinks,  or  is  the  subject  of  thought.  No 
doubt  the  divine  mind  thinks  in  all  its  actions.  But  even  the  ad- 
vocates for  materialism  do  not  hold,  that  the  divine  mind  is  mat- 
ter, or  any  property  of  matter ;  and  we  are  inquiring  after  that 
thought,  of  which  matter  is  the  subject,  or  which  is  put  forth  by 
matter.  If  the  divine  agency,  which  produces  attraction  and  re- 
pulsion, produce  thought  also,  then,  as  attraction  and  repulsion 
are  common  to  ail  matter,  it  will  follow,  that  thought  is  common 
to  all  matter.  But  this  is  expressly  denied  by  those  whom  I  am 
now  opposing. 

The  doctrine  which  I  am  considering  is,  that  matter  thinks ; 
yet  it  is  denied,  that  matter  of  itself  either  attracts  or  repels,  i.  e. 
it  is  denied  that  matter  moves  either  itself  or  any  other  matter. 
But  is  it  not  strange,  that  matter  has  no  power  of  either  attrac- 
tion or  repulsion,  and  that  all  motion  in  all  matter  should  be  the 
effect  of  an  immediate  divine  agency,  and  yet  that  it  should  have 
the  power,  without  immediate  divine  agency,  to  think  and  rea- 
son, to  choose  and  refuse,  to  love  and  hate?  Surely,  if  "  every- 
thing be  the  divine  power,"  or  the  immediate  effect  of  it ;  if  "  all 
action,  be  God's  action,  or  the  immediate  effect  of  it ;"  if  "  the 
Deity  do,"  or  immediately  cause  everything ;  if  his  "  power  be 
the   very  life  and  soul  of  everything  that  exists,  and,  strictly 

*  Correspondence  between  Price  and  Priestly,  p.  253. 


IMMATERIALITY  OF  THE  HUMAN  SOUL.  499 

speaking,  without  him,  we  are,  and  can  do,  nothing ;  then  thought, 
according  to  these  concessions,  is  the  immediate  effect  of  God's 
action  ;  it  is  an  act  of  the  mind,  and  therefore  it  is  the  immediate 
effect  of  God's  action  ;  and  as  God's  power  is  the  hfe  and  soul 
of  everything  that  exists,  our  soul  is  not  matter,  but  the  divine 
power  ;  or,  at  least,  the  divine  power  is  the  soul  of  our  soul ; 
and,  strictly  speaking,  without  him  and  his  immediate  agency  we 
cannot  think. 

If  it  should  be  said,  that  we  can  think  without  his  immediate 
agency,  and  only  his  mediate  agency  is  necessary  to  our  think- 
ing, I  ask,  v/hat  is  the  medium  which  the  divine  agency  makes 
use  of  to  the  production  of  thought  ?  Not  anything  in  or  belong- 
ing to  matter  surely  ;  for  that,  according  to  the  scheme  now  un- 
der consideration,  consists  of  nothing  but  attraction  and  repul- 
sion, directed  to  and  from  certain  indivisible  centres,  or  mathe- 
matical points.  It  will  not  be  pretended  that  these  points  are 
the  medium,  for  they  are  really  nothing  but  the  beginnings  and 
bounds  of  the  divine  agency,  in  attraction  and  repulsion.  It  will 
not  be  pretended  that  attraction  or  repulsion  is  the  medium ;  for 
they  are  nothing  but  the  immediate  divine  agency ;  and  for  the 
divine  agency  to  produce  thought  by  the  medium  of  the  divine 
agency,  is  absurd  ;  as  the  very  production  itself  is  a  divine  agen- 
cy, and  cannot  be  put  forth  by  the  medium  of  another  divine 
agency. 

So  that  it  seems,  that  all  this  cry  about  the  materiality  of  the 
soul  and  matter's  thinking,  comes  to  this,  merely,  that  God  some- 
times, by  his  immediate  agency,  produces  thought,  where  he  pro- 
duces certain  other  effects,  called  attraction  and  repulsion,  or  mo- 
tion to  and  from  certain  points  or  centres.  And  if  this  were 
ever  so  true,  could  it  with  any  propriety  be  called  matters  think- 
ing 1  or  could  it  from  these  principles  be  inferred,  that  the  hu- 
man soul  is  material  ? 

Yet  it  is  manifest,  that  this  scheme  aimed  at  something  further 
than  this.  It  is  expressly  declared,  "  that  sensation  and  thought 
do  necessarily  result  from  the  organization  of  the  brain,  when  the 
powers  of  mere  life  are  given  to  the  system."*  How  to  recon- 
cile this  with  what  was  just  now  quoted  from  the  same  author, 
that  everything  and  every  action  is  the  effect  of  the  divine  agen- 
cy, and  this,  as  has  been  just  now  shown,  an  immediate  agency, 
I  must  leave  others  to  inform  us. 

Besides,  that  sensation  and  thought  should  necessarily  result 
from  the  organization  of  the  brain,  when  the  powers  of  mere  life 
are  given  to  the  system,  is  not  reconcilable  with  what  this  same 

*  Correspondence  between  Price  and  Priestly,  p.  2505. 


500  IMMATERIALITY  OF  THE   HUMAN  SOUL. 

author  holds,  concerning  a  man  in  a  deep  sleep.  It  will  not  be 
pretended,  but  that  the  brain  of  such  a  man  is  well  organized, 
and  that  the  man  is  alive.  Yet  it  is  asserted,  that  the  soul  of  a 
man  in  that  situation  ceases  to  think.  From  this  it  follows,  that 
thought  does  not  necessarily  or  always  result  from  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  brain,  when  life  is  added. 

It  is  said  that  "  in  all  other  cases  we  deem  it  sufficient  to  say, 
that  certain  circumstances  are  the  causes,  and  the  necessary  causes 
of  certain  appearances,  if  the  appearances  always  accompany  the 
circumstances."*  But  the  appearances  of  thought  and  reason 
do  not,  according  to  the  concessions  of  our  adversaries  themselves, 
always  accompany  life,  and  the  organization  of  the  brain.  There- 
fore, by  their  own  concession,  thought  and  reason  do  not  neces- 
sarily result  from  the  organization  of  the  brain,  and  animal  life. 

It  is  said,  that  "  the  whole  man,"  meaning  soul  and  body,  "  is 
of  the  same  uniform  composition  ;"f  and  that  man  is  a  "  homo- 
geneous substance."  It  seems  then,  that  man  is  a  composition, 
and  yet  compounded  of  one  substance  only.  But  a  compound  is 
usually  made  up  of  various  ingredients.  But  passing  this,  of 
what  substance  is  man  compounded  ?  Matter  is  said  to  be  a 
mere  compasses  of  mathematical  points,  the  centres  of  attraction 
and  repulsion.  These  points  then  are  no  substance  at  all.  Nor 
are  attraction  and  repulsion  substances.  Therefore,  if  the  whole 
man  be  compounded,  or  consist  of  matter,  and  this  account  of 
matter  be  just,  man  is  compounded  of  no  substance  at  all,  and  is 
no  substance,  either  homogeneous  or  heterogeneous. 

Again,  we  are  told,  that  substance  is  the  unknown  support  of 
properties.^  But  the  support  of  attraction  and  repulsion,  which 
are  acknowledged  to  be  divine  agencies,  must  be  the  Deity  him- 
self. Then  it  follows,  that  the  substance  of  matter  is  God  him- 
self; that  the  Deity  is  a  material  being  or  substance  ;  and  if  the 
whole  man  consist  of  matter,  he  consists  of  the  divine  essence, 
and  the  Deity  is  the  to  niiv,  or  the  universe. 

Such  are  the  consequences  to  which  this  scheme  of  the  mate- 
riality of  the  human  soul  necessarily  leads  us. 

2.  It  was  proposed  to  consider  more  directly,  some  of  the  ar- 
guments by  which  it  is  attempted  to  be  proved,  that  the  human 
soul  is  material. 

These  are  principally  the  following:  That  man  can  exercise 
thought  and  reason  as  long  as  his  brain  is  in  a  state  of  soundness  ; 
but  they  cease  when  the  brain  is  destroyed ;  therefore,  as  reason 

*  Correspondence  between  Price  and  Priestly,  p.  258. 
t  Ibid.  p.  25G.  X  Ibid.  p.  364. 


IMMATERIALITY  OF  THE   HUMAN  SOUL.  501 

and  thought  depend  on  the  brain,  it  is  concluded,  that  the  soul 
is  the  brain.     On  this  I  beg  leave  to  observe, 

(1)  That  if  it  were  ever  so  true,  that  thought  depends  on  the 
brain,  still  it  may  be  an  act  of  an  immaterial  substance.  It  will 
not  be  pretended,  that  everything  on  which  the  exercise  of  thought 
and  reason  depend,  is  the  soul.  If  this  were  true,  we  should  be 
able  to  prove,  that  the  trunk  of  the  body,  the  heart,  the  lungs, 
the  neck,  etc.  are  the  soul  ;  as  thought  and  reason,  in  our  pre- 
sent state,  depend  on  every  one  of  these. 

(2)  It  is  not  true,  that  a  man  can  exercise  thought  and  reason 
as  long  as  his  brain  is  in  a  state  of  soundness,  if,  as  is  holden  by 
the  advocates  for  the  materiality  of  the  soul,  man  ceases  to  think 
in  a  deep  sleep,  and  in  a  swoon. 

(3)  As  to  that  observation,  that  thought  ceases  when  the  brain 
is  destroyed  ;  this  no  more  proves  the  brain  to  be  the  soul,  than 
the  same  argument  would  prove  the  trunk  of  the  body,  and  the 
several  vital  parts  of  it,  to  be  the  soul. 

3.  Another  argument  to  prove  the  materiality  of  the  soul,  is, 
that  the  souls  of  brutes  are  material,  and  that  they  appear  to  be 
analogous  to  human  souls.  But  it  is  not  granted  that  the  souls 
of  brutes  are  material.  The  argument  to  prove  that  they  are  ma- 
terial, is,  that  they  cease  or  are  annihilated  at  death.  In  reply  to 
this  I  observe,  that  if  they  were  annihilated  at  death,  this  would 
not  prove,  that  they  are  material.  God  may  annihilate  a  spirit 
as  well  as  matter.  But  that  they  are  annihilated  is  not  an  agreed 
point,  among  either  philosophers  or  divines. 

4.  Another  argument  is,  that  the  soul  appears  to  grow  and  to 
decay  with  the  body  ;  that  when  the  body  is  in  its  infancy,  the 
powers  of  the  soul  are,  in  correspondence  to  those  of  the  body, 
feeble  and  imperfect ;  that  as  the  body  grows,  they  increase  in 
strength  ;  and  as  the  body  decays,  they  decay.  The  answer  to 
this  is,  that  all  this  may  be  consistently  enough  with  the  supposi- 
tion of  the  immateriality  of  the  soul.  The  connection  between 
the  soul  and  body  may  be  such  as  to  produce  these  effects.  There- 
fore they  are  no  proof  either  for  or  against  the  immateriality  of 
the  soul. 

These  are  the  principal  arguments  urged  to  prove,  that  the  soul 
is  matter ;  and  the  force  of  them  I  submit  to  the  judgment  of  the 
learned  and  the  judicious. 

If,  after  all,  it  be  said,  that  though  thought  is  the  immediate 
effect  of  the  divine  agency,  and  does  not  necessarily  result  from 
the  organization  of  the  brain,  and  from  animal  life;  yet  God  al- 
ways produces  thought  in  an  organized  brain,  and  never  without 
it ;  as  he  produces  gravitation  in  all  matter,  and  never  without 

Vol.  II.  43 


502  FREE  AGENCY  AND 

it ;  so  that  thought  is  as  much  a  property  or  effect  of  matter,  as 
gravitation,  and  that  this  is  sufficient  to  answer  every  purpose 
wished  for  by  the  advocates  of  the  materiality  of  the  soul ;  and 
that  on  this  plan  we  shall  have  thought,  as  long  as  we  have  an  or- 
ganized brain,  and  no  longer.     To  all  this  I  answer  : 

1.  That  it  is  not  true,  on  the  principles  of  the  materialists 
themselves,  that  we  have  thought  as  long  as  we  have  an  organized 
brain  ;  for  they  hold,  that  in  a  deep  sleep,  and  in  a  swoon,  thought 
ceases.  Yet,  in  these  cases,  and  especially  in  a  deep  sleep,  it 
will  not  be  pretended,  that  the  brain  is  disorganized. 

2.  To  say,  that  we  are  never  the  subjects  of  thought  any  longer 
than  the  brain  remains  entire  and  properly  organized,  is  to  sup- 
pose that  the  soul  dies  with  the  body,  which  is  a  mere  begging 
of  the  question. 


FREE  AGENCY  AND  ABSOLUTE  DECREE  RECONCILED. 

Question.  How  can  we  be  free,  if  all  things  be  absolutely 
decreed  by  God  ? 

The  answer  to  this  question  wholly  depends  on  the  meaning 
of  the  word  free.  If  by  liberty  be  meant  uncertainty,  it  is  im- 
possible that  we  should  be  free  in  the  case  supposed  in  the  ques- 
tion ;  because  a  divine  decree  causes  or  implies  a  certainty  of  the 
event  decreed.  But  if  by  liberty  be  meant  spontaneity,  and  ex- 
emption from  such  force  as  admits  of  entire  opposition  of  the  will 
of  the  agent,  there  is  no  inconsistence  between  the  most  absolute 
decree  and  liberty  ;  because  with  regard  to  all  those  actions  which 
are  pretended  on  any  plan  to  be  free,  they  are  voluntary  ;  and 
just  so  far  as  they  are  so,  they  are  free  in  this  sense  of  liberty  ; 
and  to  ask  how  a  voluntary  action  can  be  free,  if  it  be  absolutely 
decreed,  is  as  absurd  as  to  ask,  how  a  free  action  can  be  free,  if 
it  be  absolutely  decreed.  The  most  absolute  decree  is  no  more 
opposed  to  liberty  in  this  sense  of  it,  than  it  is  opposed  to  any- 
thing else ;  and  we  might  as  well  say,  that  an  action  cannot  he 
benevolent  or  malevolent,  if  it  be  absolutely  decreed,  as  that  it 
cannot  be  free.  Even  many  firm  behevers  in  absolute  decrees, 
acknowledge,  that  they  cannot  reconcile  that  docrine  with  human 
liberty  ;  yet  they  firmly  believe  both.  But  I  conceive,  that  there 
is  not  the  least  difficulty  in  reconciling  them,  if  liberty  be  ex- 
plained ;  nor  can  I  conceive,  that  liberty  is  capable  of  any  other 
than  one  of  the  forementioned  senses;  either  uncertainty  and 
contingence,  or  spontaneity  and  exemption  from  involuntary  com- 


ABSOLUTE  DECREE  RECONCILED.  503 

pulsion  ;  i.  e.  such  compulsion  to  which  the  will  is,  or  may  be 
entirely  opposed.  As  to  liberty  of  self-determination,  or  the 
causation  of  volition,  by  ourselves,  if  this  were  possible,  and  were 
decreed  by  God,  or  by  any  means  were  rendered  previously  cer- 
tain, there  would  be  no  more  liberty  in  it  than  if  we  did  not  cause 
our  own  volitions  ;  because  we  should  still  be  tied  down  to  cause 
those  particular  volitions,  and  no  others.  So  that  this  mighty 
question  which  has  agitated  the  christian  world  for  ages,  is  easily 
answered,  if  we  only  explain  what  we  mean  by  liberty. 


[One  or  two  quenes  were  made  on  the  above  article  by  a  winter  in  a  subsequent 
part  of  the  volume,  to  which  the  following  is  an  answer.] 

The  author  of  the  piece  inserted  in  this  Magazine,  vol.  ii.  page 
151,  requests  either  the  author  of  a  former  piece  on  the  subjects 
of  free  agency  and  decrees,  or  some  other  writer,  to  solve  "  the 
knot,"  which  he  proposes.  Therefore  I  shall  attempt  the  solution. 
The  knot  is  thus  stated  by  the  author  himself.  ''  The  free  ac- 
tions of  men,  according  to  our  author's  (a  former  writer's)  theory, 
are  effects,  and  must  be  produced,  either  mediately  or  immedi- 
ately by  divine  power.  They  are,  therefore,  in  this  respect,  as 
passive  as  the  earth  was  in  creation.  Now  is  there  no  difficulty 
in  conceiving  how  actions,  which,  though  free  with  respect  to 
their  nature,  are  passive  with  respect  to  their  cause,  should  con- 
stitute the  agent,  the  proper  object  of  praise  or  blame  ?" 

On  this  statement  of  the  difficulty  I  remark, 

That  the  principal  ground  of  difficulty  with  our  author  is,  that 
"  the  free  actions  of  men  are  supposed  to  be  effects,  and  produced 
either  mediately  or  immediately  by  divine  power."  But  does  our 
author  suppose,  that  the  free  actions  of  men  are  not  effects  1  If  so, 
they  are  either  self-existent  and  eternal,  or  come  into  existence 
without  cause,  and  by  mere  chance  ;  neither  of  which  will  be  pre- 
tended. Therefore,  our  author  himself  must  allow,  that  the  free 
actions  of  moral  agents  are  effects  of  some  cause  or  other.  What- 
ever that  cause  be,  whether  it  be  the  divine  power,  or  any  other 
power  extrinsic  to  the  subject  of  the  actions,  is  immaterial  as  to 
the  freedom  of  those  actions.  Is  it  not  immaterial  as  to  their  free- 
dom, whether  my  actions  be  the  effects  of  the  wind,  the  rays  of 
the  sun,  the  power  of  an  angel,  or  the  power  of  God  ?  If  in  any 
one  of  these  cases  they  be  "  as  passive  as  the  the  earth  was  in 
creation,"  they  are  equally  passive  in  all  the  rest.  If,  therefore, 
there  be  a  difficulty  in  the  theory  opposed  by  our  author,  it  is  a 
difficulty  which  attends  the  theory  of  our  author  himself ;  unless 


504  FREE  AGENCY  AND 

he  deny  the  free  actions  of  moral  agents  to  be  effects.  For  if  he 
should  hold,  that  they  are  effects,  not  of  any  extrinsic  cause,  but 
of  the  person  himself,  who  is  the  subject  of  them,  still  those  actions 
are  equally  effects,  and  equally  passive  with  respect  to  their  cause, 
as  if  they  be  the  effects  of  any  ex^nj? sic  cause.  Suppose  a  man 
cut  off  his  own  hand,  the  effect  is  equally  passive,  as  if  it  were 
cut  off  by  any  other  man  ;  it  is  as  passive  as  the  earth  is  in  its 
creation.  And  if  that  act  of  the  will,  by  which  he  determines 
and  wills  to  cut  off  his  hand,  be  the  effect  of  the  man  himself,  still 
this  effect,  in  its  production,  is  as  passive  as  the  effect  of  any 
other  cause.  Therefore,  our  author's  words  may  be  retorted : 
"  Now  is  there  no  difficulty  in  conceiving  how  actions,  which, 
though  free  with  respect  to  their  nature,  are  passive  with  re- 
spect to  their  cause,  should  constitute  the  agent,  a  proper  object 
of  praise  or  blame  ?"  These  words  imply,  that  an  action,  which 
is  the  proper  object  of  praise  or  blame,  must  not  be  passive  with 
respect  to  its  cause ;  i.  e.  it  must  not  be  produced  by  its  cause. 
But  how  this  is  possible,  our  author  must  inform  us. 

Our  author  proceeds  to  illustrate  his  objection  :  "  Let  it  be  sup- 
posed, that  my  neighbor  possesses,  and  unawares,  and  without 
my  previous  consent,  exerts  a  power  to  change  my  disposition, 
from  benevolence  to  malice,  by  striking  me  with  a  magic  wand, 
or  some  other  way  ;  should  I  be  blamable  for  exercising  a  mali- 
cious disposition  ?  Would  not  all  reasonable  men  exculpate  and 
pity  me  ?  Would  they  not  say,  he  was  benevolent,  and  would 
have  continued  so  if  it  had  not  been  for  his  wicked  neighbor. 
It  is  therefore  not  his  fault,  but  his  neighbor's.  This  supposition 
may,  perhaps,  in  some  measure,  serve  to  illustrate  the  real  diffi- 
culty, which  lies  in  the  minds  of  those  who  object  to  the  doctrine 
of  the  divine  decrees."  If  this  illustrate  the  real  difficulty,  it 
deserves  our  particular  attention.  The  argument  here  urged  is, 
that  if  a  malicious  disposition  be  produced  in  me,  without  my 
previous  consent,  I  am  not  blamable  for  exercising  it.  This  im- 
plies, that  if  it  be  produced  loith  my  previous  consent,  I  am 
l)lamable  for  the  exercise  of  it.  If  so,  then  our  author  gives  up 
his  former  argument,  and  rests  his  cause  on  a  new  one.  His  for- 
mer argument  was,  that  we  are  not  blamable  for  acts  in  the  pro- 
duction of  which  we  are  passive.  But  in  the  case  now  proposed, 
I  am  entirely  passive  in  th,e  production  of  a  malicious  disposition  ; 
it  is  produced  in  me  by  another,  only  I  consent  to  its  production, 
and  therefore  am  blamable  for  the  exercise  of  malice. 

Or,  perhaps,  to  avoid  this  inconsistence,  our  author  may  explain 
himself  to  mean,  not  that  I  am  blamable  for  the  exercise  of  malice 
produced  in  me  by  another,  but  merely  for  my  consent  to  its  pro- 


ABSOLUTE  DECREE  RECONCILED.  505 

ductlon.  Be  it  so ;  then  the  question  will  arise,  how  came  this 
consent  into  existence  ?  Did  it  come  into  existence  without 
cause  ?  This  will  not  be  pretended.  Did  I  cause  it  myself?  Then 
doubtless  I  caused  it  by  a  causing  or  efficient  act,  and  this  effi- 
cient act  is  as  distinct  from  the  consent  produced,  which  is  the 
effect,  as  any  cause  is  from  its  effect.  Again  ;  this  causing  act 
is  also  an  effect,  and  requires  a  cause.  This  cause  must,  for  the 
same  reason  as  before,  be  myself,  and  I  myself  must  cause  it  by 
an  efficient  act ;  and  thus  we  must  run  into  an  infinite  series  of 
acts  causing  one  another,  which  is  absurd  and  impossible.  The 
same  absurdity  will  attend  the  supposition,  that  the  consent  now 
in  question,  was  caused  in  me  by  some  extrinsic  cause,  but  with 
my  previous  consent.  That  previous  consent  requires  a  cause, 
and  for  the  same  reason  my  previous  consent  must  concur  to  the 
causation  of  that,  and  so  on  to  infinity  ;  so  that  there  is  no  other 
possible  supposition,  than  that  the  consent,  that  my  neighbor 
should  proiluce  malice  in  me,  was  caused  by  some  extrinsic  cause 
without  my  previous  consent.  And  if  I  be  blamable  for  this 
consent,  thus  brought  into  existence  without  my  consent,  why 
may  I  not  be  equally  blamable  for  a  malicious  disposition  brought 
into  existence  in  the  same  manner  ? 

The  truth  is,  that  if  malice,  however  caused,  be  not  blamable, 
it  is  not  blamable  in  any  case.  And  if  malice,  produced  in  me 
by  my  neighbor's  magic  wand,  be  not  blamable,  it  never  can  be 
blamable.  For  whenever  it  does  exist,  it  is  produced  by  some 
cause  extrinsic  to  him,  who  is  the  subject  of  it ;  and  if  our  author 
will  show,  that  he  himself,  or  any  other  man,  can  efficiently  pro- 
duce an  exercise  of  malice  in  himself,  and  avoid  the  absurdity  of 
an  infinite  series  of  acts  in  the  same  man,  begetting  one  another, 
he  will  do  more  than  has  ever  been  done  by  any  opposer  of  the 
doctrine  of  decrees,  from  Pelagius  down  to  the  present  time. 
The  true  solution  of  our  author's  difficulty  is  this,  that  the  es- 
sence of  the  virtue  and  vice  of  benevolence  and  malice  lies  in 
the  nature  of  those  affections,  and  not  in  their  cause. 


THE  PROOF  OF  GOD'S  MORAL  PERFECTIONS  FROM 
SCRIPTURE. 

Question.  Can  the  moral  perfections  of  God  be  proved  from 
the  scriptures  alone,  without  any  argument  from  the  light  of  na- 
ture ?  Answer.  It  is  agreed,  that  unless  we  previously  know  the 
moral  perfections  of  God,  we  know  not,  when  we  read  the  scrip- 

43* 


506        THE  PROOF  OF  GOd's  MORAL  PERFECTIONS 

tures,  that  he  speaks  the  truth  ;  and  therefore  that  he  has  drawn 
a  true  character  of  himself  in  the  scriptures.  It  is,  in  this  ques- 
tion, taken  for  granted,  that  we  have  evidence  that  the  scriptures 
are  a  revelation  from  God.  Tlierefore  I  say,  that  from  the  scrip- 
tures themselves  we  have  the  same  evidence,  that  those  scriptures 
are  a  revelation  from  a  God  of  benevolence,  as  that  they  are  a 
revelation  from  a  God  of  wisdom.  The  whole  scheme  of  redemp- 
tion is  evidently  a  benevolent  scheme,  as  evidently  benevolent  as 
it  is  wise.  To  say  that  it  is  a  malevolent  scheme,  would  as  man- 
ifestly be  contrary  to  the  import  and  tendency  of  it,  as  to  say  that 
it  is  foolish,  and  betrays  a  want  of  skill  in  the  author.  Now,  if 
the  scheme  of  the  gospel  be  entirely  and  perfectly  benevolent, 
suited  to  promote  the  glory  of  God  and  the  happiness  of  the 
created  system,  to  the  highest  degree,  it  argues,  that  the  author 
of  it  is  an  entirely  benevolent  being.  The  argument  is  the  very 
same  that  we  might  draw  from  the  visible  works  of  creation  and 
providence,  if  they  were  manifestly  in  like  manner  conducive  to 
the  glory  of  God  and  the  general  good.  Every  part  of  scripture 
is  full  of  holiness  and  benevolence  ;  e.  g.  the  divine  law.  Will 
it  be  pretended,  that  an  unholy  being  is  the  author  of  the  law  ? 
We  might  as  well  say,  that  an  unskilful  being  is  the  author  of  the 
planetary  system. 

If  the  divine  law  be  a  proof  of  the  divine  holiness  and  good- 
ness, the  gospel  is  a  still  stronger  proof  of  it ;  because  it  exceeds 
in  glory,  or  in  the  display  of  holiness  and  goodness.  The  evi- 
dence of  the  holiness  of  God,  in  that  case,  is  the  same  with  the  in- 
ternal evidence,  that  the  scriptures  are  a  revelation  from  God. 
We  argue,  that  the  scriptures  are  a  revelation  from  God,  because  of 
the  transcendent  wisdom  and  holiness  which  appear  in  them.  So, 
I  argue,  that  the  author  of  the  gospel  scheme  is  a  good  being,  be- 
cause of  the  transcendent  goodness  and  holiness  which  appear  in 
it. 

Objection.  But  how  do  we  know  that  the  gospel  is  true  ;  or 
that  God  has  taken,  and  will  in  future  pursue  those  measures 
which  are  mentioned  in  the  gospel,  to  exercise  and  display  holi- 
ness and  goodness  ?  If  we  know  not  the  divine  veracity  by  other 
evidence,  how  shall  we  know  that  he  has  spoken  the  truth  in  the 
gospel  ?  I  answer,  the  gospel  consists  of  two  parts,  which  may 
be  called,  one  the  moral,  and  the  other  the  historical  part.  By 
the  moral  part  I  mean  all  the  duties  prescribed  in  the  gospel,  as 
supreme  love  to  God,  benevolence  to  our  neighbor,  repentance, 
faith,  humility,  forgiveness  of  enemies,  and  love  to  them,  prayer, 
divine  worship  in  general,  and  the  whole  of  new  obedience,  the 
examples  of  the  gospel,  particularly  that  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 


PROM  SCRIPTURE.  507 

the  holiness  of  heaven,  the  nature  of  the  rewards  of  virtue,  as 
tending  to  promote  virtue,  the  nature  and  tendency  of  the  pun- 
ishments of  sin,  to  discountenance  it. 

By  the  historical  part  of  the  gospel  I  mean  the  declarations  of 
facts,  whether  past  or  future  ;  or  history  in  the  proper  sense,  and 
predictions,  including  promises  and  threatenings,  as  declarations 
of  future  facts.  Now,  from  this  last  part  of  the  gospel  I  do  not 
at  present  argue  the  divine  holiness  and  goodness ;  but  from  the 
former  part  I  do,  and  may  argue  these  divine  attributes  as  pro- 
perly as  from  the  divine  law.  Surely  none  but  a  holy  being 
would  first  give  a  character  of  God  perfect  in  greatness,  holiness 
and  goodness,  and  then  require  us  to  love  him  supremely,  to  be 
followers  of  him  as  dear  children,  to  be  holy  as  he  is  holy,  and 
perfect  as  he  is  perfect.  No  other  being  would  require  us  to  fol- 
low the  perfect  example  of  Christ  ;  to  love  one  another  with  a 
pure  heart  fervently  ;  to  do  good  to  all,  especially  to  the  house- 
hold of  faith  ;  to  be  meek  and  lowly  of  heart ;  to  forgive  and  love 
our  enemies  ;  to  repent  of  all  our  sins  of  heart  and  life,  and  to 
forsake  them  in  future  ;  and  all  this  on  the  pain  of  the  most 
dreadful  but  just  punishment  on  the  one  hand  ;  with  the  prospect 
of  infinite  and  holy  rewards  on  the  other.  In  short,  as  the  moral 
part  of  the  gospel  is  manifestly  conducive,  in  the  highest  degree, 
to  the  glory  of  God  and  good  of  the  intellectual  system,  the  au- 
thor of  it  must  be  a  holy  and  benevolent  being. 

In  proportion  as  the  holiness  and  goodness  of  God  are  display- 
ed more  clearly  and  uniformly  in  the  law  and  gospel  of  God, 
than  in  the  works  of  creation  and  providence ;  so  much  the 
stronger  is  the  proof  from  them,  of  the  divine  moral  perfection, 
than  that  which  is  drawn  from  creation  and  providence. 

As  to  the  objection  arising  from  the  evil  in  the  world,  this  is 
expressly  solved  in  scripture,  in  that  it  informs  us,  that  it  shall  be 
overruled  for  good ;  which  is  not  made  known  in  any  other 
way. 

In  addition  to  this,  from  the  invariable  fulfilment  of  the  divine 
promises  and  threatening,  so  far  as  there  has  been  time  for  it, 
and  from  the  exact  conformity  of  all  divine  declarations  with 
truth,  I  may  argue  the  divine  veracity. 

We  all  argue,  that  any  person  is  a  person  of  veracity,  with 
whom  we  have  had  long  intercourse,  and  have  always  found  an 
exact  conformity  of  all  his  words  and  declarations  with  truth. 
Now,  mankind  have  had  intercourse  with  the  Deity  for  nearly 
six  thousand  years  ;  in  that  time  they  have  received  from  him 
many  declarations,  promises  and  threatenings  ;  and  in  no  one  of 
them  has  tiiere  been  found  any  deviation  fiom  truth  or  fact. 


508  THE  DOCTRINE  OF   ELECTION. 

Many  of  the  historical  facts  related  in  scripture  are  confirmed 
by  authentic  profane  iiistory.  Others  are  confirmed  by  eflfects 
now  remaining,  as  the  flood,  the  confusion  of  tongues,  the  burn- 
ing of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  etc.  Many  of  the  traditions,  and 
the  fables  among  the  ancient  heathen,  were  manifestly  founded 
on  the  facts  recorded  in  scripture,  and  are  a  confirmation  of  them. 
Now,  if  all  the  prophecies,  promises  and  threalenings  of  scripture 
are  fulfilled,  which  ought  to  be  fulfilled  according  to  the  time, 
may  we  not  hence  infer,  that  those  which  remain  unaccomplish- 
ed will  be  accomplished  in  their  proper  time  ?  If  all  historical 
narrations  of  scripture  are  confirmed  by  profane  history,  so  far 
as  that  history  undertakes  to  relate  the  events  of  those  times  and 
nations  ;  and  if  all  the  eflfects  of  the  events  recorded  in  scripture 
remain  to  this  day,  which  might  be  expected  to  remain  ;  may  we 
not  hence  infer  the  truth  of  the  other  narrations  of  scripture? 
If,  in  every  instance  in  which  there  is  opportunity  for  proof,  the 
truth  of  the  scriptures  is  indeed  proved,  may  we  not  hence  infer, 
that  in  those  instances,  with  regard  to  which  there  is  no  oppor- 
tunity for  proof,  the  scriptures  are  written  with  the  same  exact 
regard  to  truth  ;  and  consequently,  both  from  this  circumstance 
and  from  the  positive  declarations  of  scripture,  may  we  not  con- 
clude that  the  author  is  a  being  of  strict  veracity  and  perfect 
moral  goodness  ? 

From  the  historical  part  of  scripture,  and  from  its  predictions 
as  to  this  world  and  the  world  to  come,  we  may,  without  taking 
the  divine  veracity  for  granted,  argue  the  perfect  moral  charac- 
ter of  their  author,  in  this  manner :  Suppose  the  scripture  a  mere 
drama;  this  drama  consists  of  a  great  variety  of  supposed  facts, 
characters  and  scenes.  But  all  these,  taken  together,  most  di- 
rectly and  powerfully  tend  to  the  encouragement  of  virtue  and 
moral  good,  without  anything,  on  the  whole,  of  an  opposite  ten- 
dency. What  is  to  be  inferred  from  this  concerning  the  autiior  ? 
Doubtless  that  he  is  a  strong  friend  to  virtue  and  moral  good.  In 
this  manner  we  do,  in  fact,  argue  concerning  all  dramatic  writers. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  ELECTION. 

It  is  commonly  objected  to  this  doctrine,  that  it  implies  par- 
tiality, inconsistence  and  insincerity  in  the  Deity.  Let  us  at- 
tend to  these  objections.  First,  Does  the  doctrine  imply  par- 
tiality in  the  Deity  ?  This  depends  wholly  on  the  meaning  which 
we  afllix  to  the  word  partiality.     If  we  mean  by  it,  an  inclina- 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  ELECTION.  509 

tion  to  bestow,  in  the  way  of  sovereign  wisdom,  favor  on  one, 
and  not  on  another,  doubtless  God  is  partial,  in  dispensing  not 
only  spiritual  and  eternal  favors,  but  those  which  relate  to  this  life. 
God  makes  one  rich  and  another  poor  ;  raises  one  to  great  honor 
and  promotion,  and  leaves  another  in  a  low  and  obscure  state  ; 
gives, one  every  advantage  for  enjoyment  arising  from  tranquillity, 
health,  agreeable  connections,  etc.  but  not  to  another.  If,  there- 
fore, this  be  partiality,  there  is  no  reason  to  make  this  objection 
peculiarly  against  the  doctrine  of  election  ;  it  lies  equally  against 
the  most  common  dealings  of  providence.  And  if  this  objection 
be  of  force  to  disprove  the  doctrine  of  election,  it  is  of  the  same 
force  to  disprove  the  governing  providence  of  God,  in  the  com- 
mon events  of  life.  Yet  all  christians  profess  to  believe  this  com- 
mon governing  providence  of  God.  Therefore  they  cannot,  with 
consistence,  object  partiality  to  the  divine  election  of  a  certain 
number  to  eternal  life.  If,  indeed,  the  Deity  exercise  his  sove- 
reignty in  election,  not  wisely,  nor  so  as  to  subserve  the  best  pur- 
poses, there  is  just  ground  of  objection  ;  and  so  there  is,  if  he  do 
not  in  common  providence  subserve  the  best  purposes.  But  this 
stating  of  the  objection  gives  up  the  objection  to  election  as  such, 
or  to  the  general  doctrine,  that  God  chooses  some  to  eternal  life, 
and  leaves  others  to  suffer  eternal  death  ;  and  it  raises  another 
objection  against  the  ends  or  purposes  which  God  has  in  view, 
and  actually  subserves  by  election.  Therefore  it  is  incumbent 
on  the  objector  to  show,  that  God  does  not,  in  election,  design 
and  subserve  the  best  and  most  important  ends  or  purposes. 

2.  Sometimes  the  word  partiality  is  applied  to  a  judge,  in  the 
exercise  of  his  judicial  capacity  ;  and  I  grant  that  whenever  a 
person  is  partial  to  the  parties  brought  before  him,  he  violates  his 
integrity  ;  as  partiality  in  this  case  implies,  that  the  judge  is  dis- 
posed to  favor  a  person  beyond  what  the  law,  which  is  the  rule 
of  judgment,  admits.  The  law  is  the  sole  rule  of  proceeding  to 
a  judge  acting  in  a  judicial  capacity  ;  but  this  is  not  the  sole  rule 
of  proceeding  to  a  sovereign,  acting  as  a  sovereign.  His  chief 
rule  of  proceeding  is  the  general  good  ;  and  in  promoting  this, 
he  often  is  not  only  justifiable  in  acting  beside  and  above  strict 
law,  but  is  necessitated  to  do  it ;  and  whenever  the  general  good 
requires,  that  he  bestow  favor  on  one  and  not  on  another  equally 
deserving,  or  ill  deserving ;  not  only  is  his  conduct  vindicable, 
but  it  could  not  be  vindicated,  if  he  were  to  do  otherwise.  And 
election  is  not  the  act  of  a  judge,  but  of  a  sovereign. 

Secondly,  It  is  objected,  that  if  God  choose  that  a  certain  num- 
ber of  mankind  should  repent,  comply  with  the  gospel,  and  be 
saved ;  and  that  the  rest  should  not  comply,  but  should  go  on  in 


510 


THE  DOCTRINE   OF  ELECTION. 


sin  and  perish,  and  yet  command  and  call  on  all  to  comply  with 
the  gospel ;  this  is  to  act  an  inconsistent  part.  His  will  that  they 
should  go  on  in  sin,  is  inconsistent  with  his  commands,  and  calls 
to  forsake  it  and  repent  of  it. 

Answer.  Undoubtedly,  God  on  the  whole  chooses,  that  all 
who  do  finally  go  on  in  sin,  should  thus  go  on,  otherwise  he 
would  restrain  them.  So  it  is  proved  by  manifest  fact,  that  God 
does,  on  the  wiiole,  or  all  things  considered,  choose,  that  all  those 
who  finally  remain  impenitent,  should  remain  in  that  state.  Even 
if  what  some  have  pleaded  be  true,  t!mt  God  cannot  restrain  a 
man  from  sin  consistently  with  his  free  agency,  still  this  would 
not  disprove  what  is  now  asserted,  that  all  things  considered  God 
chooses,  that  those  who  are  finally  impenitent,  should  remain  im- 
penitent. If  he  did  not  choose  this,  he  would  restrain  them,  and 
lead  them  to  repentance,  though  their  free  agency  should  be  de- 
stroyed. At  the  same  time,  it  is  an  undoubted  fact,  that  God 
,forbids  all  sin.  Therefore,  if  it  be  an  inconsistence,  that  God 
)  should  forbid  all  sin,  and  yet  choose,  all  things  considered,  that 
some  men  should  go  on  in  sin,  it  is  not  an  inconsistence  peculiar 
to  the  system  of  those  who  hold  the  doctrine  of  election  ;  but  it 
equally  attends  the  system  of  those  who  deny  that  doctrine  ;  and 
it  equally  concerns  the  latter  as  the  former,  to  provide  a  proper 
solution  of  the  difficulty.  If  this  be  an  inconsistence,  it  is  a  very 
common  one,  extending  not  only  to  the  case  of  the  reprobate  and 
finally  impenitent,  but  to  every  sinner  and  every  sin,  whether  of 
commission  or  omission.  The  sins  of  the  elect,  wdiether  before 
or  after  their  conversion,  are  as  peremptorily  forbidden  in  the  di- 
vine law,  as  the  sins  of  the  non-elect ;  and  the  fact  shows,  that 
God  as  really  chooses,  all  things  considered,  that  the  elect  should 
fall  into  these  sins,  as  that  the  non-elect  should  into  those  of 
which  they  are  guilty.  Therefore,  whenever  any  sin  takes  place, 
or  whenever  any  person  falls  short  of  perfect  holiness,  God  acts 
the  same  inconsistent  part  complained  of  in  the  objection  before 
us  ;  and  God  is  no  more  inconsistent  in  reprobating  a  sinner,  or 
choosing,  all  things  considered,  that  he  should  finally  go  on  in 
sin,  and  yet  absolutely  enjoin  upon  him  a  compliance  with  the 
gospel,  than  he  does  in  choosing  that  a  saint  should  not  be  perfectly 
holy  in  this  life,  and  yet  absolutely  requiring  of  him  perfect  hoH- 
ness.  This  then  seems  to  bring  down  the  objection  very  consid- 
ably,  and  represents  it  in  a  much  less  formidable  light.  I  have 
never  heard  it  objected,  that  the  Deity  acts  inconsistently  in  re- 
quiring perfect  holiness,  and  yet  choosing,  all  things  considered, 
that  a  particular  saint  should  not  be  perfectly  sanctified  in  this 
life. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  ELECTION.  511 

After  all,  there  is  no  real  inconsistence  in  the  case  stated  in  the 
objection.  The  law  and  precepts  of  God  inform  us  what  our 
duty  is  ;  but  they  do  not  inform  us  of  his  intentions  as  to  the  fu- 
ture dispensations  of  liis  providence.  They  inform  us,  that  it  is 
our  duty  to  be  perfectly  holy,  but  do  not  inform  us,  that  it  is 
God's  intention  to  make  us  perfectly  holy  in  this  life  ;  or  that  all 
things  considered,  he  chooses  we  should  attain  to  perfection  in 
this  life.  Therefore,  when  in  the  precepts  of  the  divine  law, 
God  declares  our  duty  to  us,  and  in  other  passages  of  scripture 
he  informs  us,  that  it  is  his  intention  and  choice,  all  things  con- 
sidered, that  we  should  not  be  perfectly  holy  in  this  life,  there  is 
no  contradiction  ;  nor  is  there  any  inconsistence  between  enjoin- 
ing duty  upon  us,  and  choosing,  that  we  should  not,  in  every  in- 
stance, perform  our  duty.  A  human  legislator  may  consistently 
forbid  all  rebellion  against  the  state,  and  yet  being  fully  assured, 
that  if  a  certain  man  should  rebel  against  the  state,  it  would  give 
occasion  to  the  more  firm  establishment  of  the  most  just  and  free 
government,  and  to  the  great  increase  of  the  good  of  the  nation, 
inconceivably  overbalancing  the  evils  of  the  rebellion,  he  may 
wish  that  man  would  rebel.  A  parent  may  strictly  forbid  his 
children  to  intoxicate  themselves,  and  if  he  be  assured,  that  pro- 
vided his  son,  who  has  naturally  a  strong  appetite  for  strong  drink, 
and  therefore  is  exposed  to  great  and  confirmed  intemperance  be 
once  intoxicated,  he  will  have  such  a  loathing  of  strong  drink 
in  future,  that  he  will  never  fall  into  intemperance  again  ;  he 
may  consistently  wish,  that  he  would  once  intoxicate  himself. 
With  the  same  consistence,  God  may  forbid  sin,  and  yet  in  the 
foreknowledge  of  wise  and  important  ends  to  be  subserved  by  it, 
may  consent  and  choose,  that  it  should  take  place. 

Thirdly  ;  it  is  objected,  that  if  God  choose  that  some  men 
should  not  comply  with  the  gospel,  and  dispose  things  so  in  provi- 
dence, that  it  infallibly  follows,  that  they  will  not  comply,  there  is 
no  sincerity  in  the  calls  and  offers  of  the  gospel.  This  objection  con- 
sists of  two  parts  ;  1.  If  God  choose  that  some  should  not  comply 
with  the  gospel,  there  is  no  sincerity  in  the  calls  and  offers  of  the 
gospel.  This  wholly  depends  on  the  meaning  of  the  word  sin- 
cerity. If  it  mean,  that  when  God  offers  salvation  to  any  man, 
he  really  chooses,  all  things  considered,  that  the  man  should  be 
saved ;  I  grant,  that  in  this  sense,  there  is  no  sincerity  in  the  of- 
fer. But  sincerity  does  not  necessarily  imply  this,  and  is  not  al- 
ways used  in  this  sense  ;  e.  g.  If  my  son  should  be  disposed  to  quit 
his  present  state  of  residence,  and  remove  to  another,  if  it  be  ever 
so  contrary  to  my  judgment  and  wishes ;  yet  if  I  find  him  fixed 
in   the  purpose,  I   may  seriously  offer  him,  that  if  he  remove,  I 


512  ON  MORAL  AGENCY. 

will  provide  him  a  house  in  the  proposed  place.  If  a  man  have  a 
son  at  college  ;  if  the  son  be  sick  of  college,  and  utterly  averse  to 
continuing  there,  the  father,  from  various  proper  motives  may  of- 
fer him,  that  if  he  be  determined  to  quit  college,  he  will  set  him 
up  in  trade  or  husbandry  as  the  father  shall  judge  to  be  best ;  yet 
he  wishes  that  his  son  would  not  persist  in  his  purposes.  If  in 
these  cases  the  father  intends  to  do  as  he  says,  provided  the  son 
fulfils  the  condition  of  the  offer,  the  offer  is  sincere,  though,  at  the 
same  time,  the  father  may  wish,  that  the  son  should  not  fulfil  the 
condition,  i.  e.  in  the  instances  above  mentioned,  the  father  may 
wish  his  son  not  to  quit  college,  or  to  quit  his  present  place  of 
residence. 

2.  The  other  part  of  the  objection  is,  that  if  God,  in  provi- 
dence, set  such  motives  before  sinners,  as  to  lead  them  to  remain 
impenitent ;  or  if  he  any  how  so  dispose  of  events,  that  it  cer- 
tainly follows,  that  they  will  remain  impenitent ;  there  is  no  sin- 
cerity in  the  offers  of  the  gospel.  But  if  God  may  sincerely  offer 
salvation  to  some  men,  and  yet  choose  on  the  whole,  that  they 
should  not  accept  the  offer ;  why  may  he  not,  with  the  same  sin- 
cerity, use  any  influence  consistent  with  the  free  agency  of  those 
men,  to  dissuade  them  from  a  compliance  with  the  condition  of 
the  offer  ?  Why  may  not  the  parent  in  the  case  above  stated, 
let  the  son  know,  that  he  does  not  think  it  best  he  should  leave 
his  present  residence,  and  use  all  proper  motives  to  persuade  him 
to  continue  where  he  is ;  and  yet,  if  he  still  be  determined  to  re- 
move, sincerely  make  him  the  ofTer  before  mentioned. 


ON  MORAL  AGENCY. 

A  writer  has  raised  this  question  :  Is  a  capacity  to  know  our 
duty  necessary  to  moral  agency  1  On  this  question  I  am  wil- 
ling to  give  my  opinion,  and  the  reasons. 

The  meaning  of  the  question  I  conceive  to  be,  whether  a  capa- 
city to  know  our  duty  or  obligation  in  any  case,  be  necessary  to 
the  existence  of  moral  obligation  in  that  case  ;  and  whether  duty 
or  moral  obligation  bind  us  any  further  than  our  capacity  to  know 
our  duty  ?  In  this  sense  of  the  question,  I  answer,  that  a  capa- 
city to  know  our  duty  is  necessary  to  moral  agency. 

Capacity  is  power  and  opportunity.  Power  to  know  our  duty 
is  the  power  of  rational  understanding,  and  implies  that  the  sub- 
ject is  a  rational  being  ;  and  if  capacity  to  know  our  duty  be  not 
necessary  to  moral  agency,  neither  is  it  necessary,  that  we  be  pes- 


MORAL  AGENCY.  513 

sessed  of  reason.  But  we  may  be  as  stupid  as  brutes,  and  yet  be 
moral  agents.  Nay,  brutes  themselves  may  be  moral  agents.  But 
as  some  may  acknowledge  the  consequence,  and  hold  that  brutes 
are  moral  agents,  let  us  attend  to  this  before  we  proceed. 

If  neither  actual  knowledge  of  duty,  nor  a  capacity  to  know  it 
be  necessary  to  moral  agency  ;  not  only  will  it  follow,  that  brutes 
are  moral  agents,  but  nothing  appears  but  that  tiiey  are  moral 
agents  in  as  high  a  degree  as  we  are.  The  only  reasons  which 
can  be  assigned  why  they  are  not  moral  agents  in  the  same  degree 
that  we  are,  are  these  ;  that  we  are  capable  of  knowing  more,  and 
in  most  instances  do  know  more  than  they.  But  if  neither  know- 
ledge, nor  a  capacity  of  knowledge  be  necessary  to  moral  agency, 
we  may  be  moral  agents  in  the  same  degree  without  as  with  them. 
If  we  knew,  and  were  capable  of  knowing  no  more  than  the 
brutes,  we  should  be  just  as  accountable  for  all  our  conduct  as 
we  are  now.  Therefore  brutes  are  in  the  same  degree  account- 
able as  we  are. 

It  will  be  in  vain  to  pretend,  that  brutes  are  moral  agents  of  a 
lower  degree,  according  to  their  lower  degrees  of  knowledge  and 
capacity.  This  would  imply  that  moral  agency  depends  on  ca- 
pacity ;  and  the  greater  this  is,  the  higher  is  the  degree  of  moral 
agency  accompanying  it  ;  and  the  smaller  the  capacity  is,  the 
lower  is  the  degree  of  moral  agency.  Hence  it  will  follow,  that 
if  there  be  no  capacity  of  knowledge  in  any  degree,  there  is  no 
moral  agency.  But  a  capacity  of  knowledge  in  any  degree  is  a  ca- 
pacity to  know  our  duty  in  the  same  degree.  So  that,  on  this 
state  of  the  argument,  either  we  may  be  moral  agents  without  any 
capacity  of  knowing  anything,  and  although  we  be  as  stupid  as 
a  door  nail,  which  is  absurd  ;  or  we  are  moral  agents  in  the  same 
degree  in  which  we  possess  a  capacity  to  know  our  duty,  which 
is  all  for  which  I  contend. 

Besides ;  that  the  beasts  are  not  moral  agents  is  everywhere 
represented  in  scripture.  Ps.  73:  22,  "  So  foolish  was  I  and  ig- 
norant ;  I  was  as  a  beast  before  thee  ;"  i.  e.  I,  though  a  rational 
creature  and  a  moral  agent,  acted  as  if  I  was  as  ignorant  and  stupid 
as  a  beast,  who  has  no  reason  or  moral  agency.  But  if  beasts  be 
moral  agents,  the  argument  seems  to  have  no  force.  For  what 
wonder,  if  one  who  is  a  moral  agent,  and  in  the  same  degree  as 
another,  should  act  like  that  other  ?  But  that  a  rational  being  and 
moral  agent  should  act  like  one  that  is  no  moral  agent,  and  has  no 
reason,  is  indeed  wonderful.  Prov.  30:  2,  3,  "  Surely  I  am 
more  brutish  than  any  man,  and  have  not  the  understanding  of  a 
man.  I  neither  learned  wisdom,  nor  have  the  knowledge  of  the 
holy."     If  brutes  be  moral  agents,  they  are  as  capable  of  the 

Vol.  II.  44 


514  MORAL  AGENCY. 

knowledge  of  the  holy,  as  they  are  of  moral  agency.  Psal.  49: 
12,  "  Man  being  in  honor,  abideth  not ;  he  is  like  the  beasts 
that  perish."  If  beasts  be  moral  agents,  the  subjects  of  virtue  and 
vice,  and  the  proper  subjects  of  eternal  rewards  and  punishments, 
surely  they  no  more  perish  than  man.  And  can  it  be  imagined, 
that  if  beasts  were  moral  agents  equally  as  man,  equally  account- 
able, and  equally  immortal,  they  would  have  been  given  to  man, 
to  be  slaughtered  by  him  for  his  meat  ?  On  this  supposition,  why 
should  not  man  have  been  given  to  the  beasts,  to  be  their  meat  ? 

Besides ;  if  beasts  be  moral  agents,  they  are  doubtless  sinners, 
as  they  discover  a  general  selfishness,  and  sometimes  such  anger 
and  revenge,  as  in  moral  agents  is  very  far  from  perfect  holiness. 
But  if  they  be  sinners  vile  and  polluted  with  sin,  it  would  seem 
strange,  that  they  should  be  made  sacrifices,  typical  of  the  pure 
and  perfect  sacrifice  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

But  to  say  no  more  concerning  beasts,  if  an  incapacity  of  know- 
ing duty  be  not  inconsistent  with  moral  agency,  natural  inability  to 
do  duty  is  not  inconsistent  with  it.  For  instance,  in  my  present 
situation  I  am  incapable  of  knowing  the  laws  of  the  Emperor 
of  China  ;  and  therefore,  though  I  were  one  of  his  subjects,  I 
should  be  no  more  bound  to  present  observance  of  them,  than  if 
he  were  to  make  an  edict,  that  I  should  fly  to  the  moon.  If  God 
were  now  to  publish  in  China  the  institution  of  a  third  sacrament, 
for  the  general  use  of  mankind,  we  here  should  be  immediately 
bound  to  observe  it,  before  we  had  any  information  of  it,  unless 
an  incapacity  to  know  it,  free  us  from  obligation  to  observe  it.  On 
the  same  ground  the  heathen,  who  have  never  heard  of  the  Savior, 
or  of  his  sacraments,  are  to  be  condemned  and  punished  for  their 
unbelief  in  the  former,  and  their  neglect  of  the  latter.  If  we  had 
no  more  knowledge  nor  capacity  than  horses,  why  should  we  be 
more  blamable  than  they,  for  any  sensual  gratification  ? 

Capacity  or  power  to  know  our  duty,  is  necessary  to  moral 
agency,  for  the  same  reason  that  the  requisite  means  of  informa- 
tion concerning  our  duty  in  any  particular  case,  is  necessary  to 
moral  obligation  in  that  case  ;  for  instance,  that  baptism  and  the 
Lord's  supper  are  of  divine  institution.  Now,  a  capacity  or  power 
of  understanding  sufficient  to  comprehend  thai  information,  is 
equally  necessary  to  the  possession  of  the  information,  as  the  ex- 
ternal means  requisite  for  the  information  ;  and  therefore  it  is 
equally  necessary  to  obligation  to  celebrate  those  divine  institu- 
tions, as  the  external  means  of  information,  that  they  are  of  di- 
vine institution,  and  therefore  obligatory.  But  I  presume  none 
will  deny,  that  the  requisite  external  means  of  information  with 
regard  to  the  sacraments,  are  necessary  to  obligation  to  celebrate 


MORAL  AGENCY.  515 

them.  For  the  same  reason,  capacity  to  understand  that  informa- 
tion is  necessary  to  the  same  obhgation,  for  it  is  a  necessary  means 
of  information  ;  and  so  in  all  cases  of  duty. 

I  presume  it  will  be  granted,  that  knowledge,  and  the  capacity 
and  means  of  the  knowledge  of  our  duty,  aggravate  sin  in  any 
case,  and  that  the  less  knowledge,  and  the  less  capacity  for  know- 
ing duty  a  person  has,  the  less  is  his  sin.  Sin  then  is  diminished 
in  the  same  proportion  as  the  capacity  of  knowledge  is.  And  why 
is  it  not  entirely  extinguished  when  the  capacity  is  ?  Surely 
some  substantial  reason  must  be  given  to  show  that  this  is  not 
the  effect. 

Where  no  law  is,  there  is  no  transgression.  But  can  a  law  be 
said  to  exist  with  regard  to  a  pei'son  who  has  no  power  or  capa- 
city to  know  the  law  ?  Suppose  God  should  send  us  a  law  written 
in  the  language  of  the  Nawdowessies,  would  it  be  a  law  with  re- 
spect to  us,  so  that,  without  any  means  of  knowing  its  contents. 
we  should  be  bound  to  obey  it  ?  I  presume  all  candid  men  would 
say,  that  it  is  no  more  law  to  us,  or  binding  on  us,  without  the 
necessary  means  of  knowing  the  tenor  of  it,  than  if  it  never  had 
been  made. 

It  will  not  be  denied,  that  no  law  is  binding  on  a  creature  which 
is  not  a  just  and  a  good  law,  subservient  to  the  general  good  ;  and 
that  God  is  incapable  of  enacting  any  other  than  such  a  law. 
Now,  is  not  a  law  requiring  services,  which  the  creature,  if  he  be 
ever  so  attentive  and  candid,  and  though  he  be  perfectly  holy,  is 
incapable  of  understanding,  an  unjust  law  ?  And  is  it  not  mani- 
fest, that  such  a  law  would  not  be  a  good  law,  and  not  subservi- 
ent to  the  general  good  or  the  glory  of  God  ?  If  so,  then  God 
has  never  made  such  a  law,  and  can  no  more  make  it,  than  he 
can  deny  himself;  and  therefore  we  neither  are,  nor  can  be  under 
such  a  law  ;  which  is  the  same  as  to  say,  we  neither  are  nor  can 
be  bound  to  do  anything  which  we  are  incapable  of  knowing  to 
be  our  duty  ;  because  God  is  incapable  of  making  a  law  requir- 
ing of  us  any  such  thing. 

Sins  of  invincible  ignorance  have  hitherto  been  allowed  to  be 
no  sins.  But  the  principle  which  I  am  opposing  is  a  direct  con- 
tradiction to  that  hitherto  acknowledged  maxim. 

The  scriptures  plainly  support  the  sentiment  for  which  I  plead. 
Rom.  I:  20,  21,  "  So  that  they  are  without  excuse  ;  because  that 
when  they  knew  God  they  glorified  him  not  as  God,  neither 
were  they  thankful  ;"  implying,  that  if  they  had  not  known 
God,  or  had  not  had  the  means,  opportunity,  and  capacitij  of 
that  knowledge,  they  would  not  have  been  without  excuse.  Verse 
18,  '•'  The  wrath  of  God  is  revealed  from  heaven  against  all  un- 


516  MORAL  AGENCY. 

righteousness,  and  ungodliness  of  men,  who  hold  the  truth  in  un- 
righteousness." It  seems  then,  that  the  wrath  of  God  is  not  re- 
vealed against  those  who  do  not  hold  the  truth  in  unrighteous- 
ness, but  are  entirely  incapable  of  holding  it.  John  15:  24,  "  If 
I  had  not  come  and  spoken  unto  them,  they  had  not  had  sin  ;  but 
now  they  have  no  cloak  for  their  sin."  Chap.  9:  41,  "If  ye 
were  blind,  ye  should  have  no  sin  ;  but  ye  say,  ive  see ;  therefore 
your  sin  remaineth." 

I  shall  now  consider  some  objections  to  the  sentiment  for  which 
I  plead.  It  is  said  in  the  piece  above  referred  to,  "  if  by  capacity 
be  meant  something  distinct  from  all  mental  perception  and  know- 
ledge, and  antecedent  to  all  such  perception,  it  is  not  easy  to 
discern  the  influence  which  this  can  have  on  actual  mental  ex- 
ercise, in  determining  its  quality."  The  power  of  reason  in  man 
is  something  distinct  from  mental  perception  and  knowledge,  and 
antecedent  to  it ;  and  has  not  this  an  influence  to  determine  the 
moral  quality  of  the  mental  exercises  of  those  who  possess  reason  ? 
A  beast  takes  his  chief  pleasure  in  animal  gratifications  ;  some 
men  do  the  same.  The  last  are  acknowledged  to  act  a  criminal 
part  in  this  instance  ;  the  first  are  generally  acknowledged  to  be 
innocent.  The  reason  generally  given  for  the  innocence  of  the 
latter  is,  that  they  are  not  possessed  of  rational  powers.  And  what 
bther  reason  can  be  given  for  it  ?  or  for  the  difference  as  to  inno- 
cence in  this  instance  between  beasts  and  men  ?  If  no  other  rea- 
son can  be  given,  this  doubtless  is  the  true  reason  ;  and  if  this  be 
the  true  reason,  something,  which  is  distinct  from  mental  per- 
ception and  antecedent  to  it,  has  influence  in  determining  the 
moral  quality  of  mental  exercise,  whether  we  can  discern  how  it 
has  this  effect  or  not.  If  reason  be  not  necessary  to  moral  agen- 
cy, an  oyster  may  be  as  virtuous  and  holy  as  the  apostle  Paul,  or 
as  wicked  as  Judas.  Will  it  be  pretended,  that  madmen  and 
perfect  idiots  are  as  really  accountable  for  their  anger,  malice  and 
revenge,  as  they  would  be,  if  they  were  in  possession  of  their 
reason  ?  Yet  if  they  had  the  power  of  reason,  they  would  be  ac- 
countable for  those  exercises.  Therefore  something  distinct  from 
menial  perception  and  antecedent  to  it,  would  determine  the  mo- 
ral quality  of  their  exercises. 

External  means  of  grace,  opportunities  to  know  the  truth,  and 
to  be  persuaded  to  embrace  it,  have  an  influence  to  aggravate  sin  ; 
i.  e.  to  determine  the  moral  quality  of  exercises  of  the  heart ;  yet 
they  are  distinct  from  those  exercises,  and  may  be  and  commonly 
are  antecedent  to  them. 

It  is  further  pleaded,  that  "  the  supposition,  that  any,  either 
power  or  capacity,  of  this  sort,  has  any  such  influence,  would  im- 


MORAL  AGENCY.  517 

ply  that  both  virtue  and  vice  depend  on  the  nature  and  quality  of 
their  cause."  But  the  power  of  reason,  external  means,  oppor- 
tunities, the  calls  and  invitations  of  the  gospel,  etc.  are  not  the  ef- 
ficient causes  of  virtue  or  vice,  they  are  however  the  occasions, 
or  causa  sine  qua  7ion,  as  it  is  said.  Therefore,  though  virtue 
and  vice  depend  on  the  power  of  reason,  and,  in  many  cases,  on 
external  means,  opportunities,  etc.  yet  they  do  not  depend  on  the 
nature  and  quality  of  tJieir  efficient  cause.  They  do  indeed  de- 
pend on  the  nature  of  their  subject,  so  that  they  cannot  take  place 
in  a  block  or  a  brute,  as  they  can  in  a  rational  being. 

It  is  further  said,  "  the  nature  and  quality  of  mental  exercises 
and  perceptions  are  to  be  found  in  those  perceptions,  and  belong 
to  them."  But  if  tlie  exercise  be  merely  animal,  without  a  pow- 
er in  the  subject  to  know,  that  his  animal  affections  ought  to  be 
governed  by  reason,  and  a  regard  to  the  general  good  ;  to  say, 
that  it  is  of  a  moral  nature,  as  when  the  same  animal  affection  ex- 
ists in  the  mind  of  a  rational  being,  is  a  mere  begging  of  the  ques- 
tion ;  and  implies,  that  brutes  are  moral  agents  as  well  as  men. 
Supreme  self-love,  or  selfishness,  is  found  in  an  ox,  and  it  is  found 
in  a  man.  The  nature  and  quality  of  this  exercise,  so  far  as  is 
independent  of  reason  and  other  things  extrinsic  to  the  exercise 
itself,  may  be  the  same  in  both  instances  ;  yet  it  cannot  be  as- 
serted that  in  both  instances  they  are  equally  vicious  and  deserv- 
ing of  punishment. 

The  principal  plea  in  all  these  objections  is,  that  what  is  dis- 
tinct from  a  moral  exercise  and  antecedent  to  it,  can  have  no  in- 
fluence on  its  moral  quality.  But  it  is  confessed  on  all  hands,  that 
the  knowledge  of  duty  has  an  influence  on  moral  exercise,  and 
greatly  aggravates  sin.  "  Pie  that  knoweth  his  master's  will,  and 
doth  it  not,  shall  be  beaten  with  many  stripes."  For  instance, 
he  that  knoweth,  that  selfishness  is  wrong,  is  more  aggravatedly 
sinful  than  he  who  has  not  that  knowledge,  and  is  the  subject  of 
the  same  selfishness.  But  knowledge  in  this  case  is  something 
distinct  from  the  moral  exercise,  and  may  be  antecedent  to  it. 
Therefore,  the  maxim  of  our  author,  "  that  nothing  Avhich  is  dis- 
tinct from  moral  exercise,  and  antecedent  to  it,  has  the  least  influ- 
ence in  determining  its  natural  quality,"  does  not  hold  good. 

The  whole  question  is,  what  is  necessary  to  constitute  a  moral 
agent  ?  A  moral  agent  is  a  proper  subject  of  moral  government ; 
and  moral  government  is  a  government  by  laws  and  sanctions,  by 
offers,  proposals,  and  rational  motives.  But  how  can  a  being, 
who  is  not  capable  of  knowing  laws  and  sanctions,  offers,  propo- 
sals, and  rational  motives,  be  the  proper  subject  of  such  govern- 
ment ? 

44* 


518  DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS. 


DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS. 

1.  The  gospel  was  first  published  among  an  ignorant,  obscure, 
and  superstitious  people,  and  therefore  obtained  credit  among 
them  ;  and  at  the  same  time,  was  neglected  by  other  nations, 
because  they  despised  the  Jews,  and  knew  their  superstition. 

Answer.  The  Jews  were  the  least  superstitious,  the  most 
knowing,  and  best  informed  in  religion,  of  all  the  nations  then  in 
the  world.  No  nation  had  so  just  and  rational  ideas  of  God  and 
religion.  Therefore,  a  false  and  absurd  scheme  of  religion  was 
not  so  likely  to  obtain  credit  among  them,  as  among  any  other 
nation.  And  if  the  Jews  and  their  religion  were  neglected  and 
despised  by  other  nations,  this  surely  could  be  no  reason  why 
they  received  and  practised  that  religion.  Besides,  if  Christianity 
spread  among  other  nations,  because  they  despised  and  neglected 
the  Jews  and  their  superstition,  why,  for  the  same  reason,  did  not 
Judaism  spread  equally  as  Christianity  ?  The  Jews  compassed 
sea  and  land  to  make  one  proselyte.  In  proportion  as  the  Jews 
and  their  religion  were  despised  by  other  nations,  the  probability 
was  the  less,  that  Christianity  would  be  received  from  them  by 
those  nations. 

2.  The  learned  and  benevolent  Pliny,  and  other  learned  and 
good  men,  would  have  received  the  gospel,  if  it  had  been  credi- 
ble, and  the  facts  true. 

Answer.  It  is  exactly  according  to  the  gospel,  that  many 
learned  men  should  neglect  it.  "  Not  many  wise  men  after  the 
flesh,  not  many  mighty,  not  many  noble,  are  called."  Some 
great  and  learned  men,  in  all  ages,  have  accordingly  rejected  the 
gospel.  If  it  had  been  otherwise,  it  would  have  been  a  good  ar- 
gument against  the  gospel.  And  it  might  have  been  just  as  forci- 
bly argued,  that  Hume  did  not  believe  the  gospel,  therefore  it  is 
not  true,  as  that  Pliny  did  not  believe  it,  therefore  it  is  not  true. 
If  they  both  had  believed  it,  it  would  have  been  no  demonstration 
of  its  truth. 

3.  Christianity  was  soon  persecuted,  and  persecution  always 
spreads  the  religion  which  is  persecuted.  No  wonder  then  Chris- 
tianity soon  obtained  an  extensive  footing. 

Answer.  It  is  not  true,  that  persecution  always  makes  the  re- 
ligion persecuted  prevail,  as  Christianity  prevailed.  Paganism  was 
persecuted  by  the  christian  Roman  emperors ;  Mohammedanism 
was  greviously  persecuted  in  Spain  ;  heathenism,  in  South  Amer- 
ica, by  the  Spaniards ;  and  Judaism  has  generally,  in  all  ages, 
suffered  persecution.     Yet  none  of  these  religions  flourished  and 


DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS.  519 

increased  under  persecution,  as  Christianity  did.  Therefore, 
there  was  something  peculiar  to  Christianity;  and  what  could 
this  be,  but  the  manifest  truth  of  the  facts  ;  on  wliich  it  was 
founded,  and  of  the  doctrines  which  it  taught? 

4.  It  was  at  first  tolerated  at  Rome,  till  it  obtained  a  footing  ; 
and  after  that  it  was  impossible  to  root  it  out. 

Answer.  It  is  curious  to  observe,  the  inconsistence  of  the  ob- 
jections, which  the  enemies  of  Christianity  bring  against  it.  In 
tiie  last  objection,  the  prevalence  of  Christianity  was  attempted  to 
be  accounted  for  by  the  persecution  which  it  suffered.  Now  the 
same  thing  is  accounted  for  by  the  toleration  afforded  to  it.  Be- 
sides, though  it  was  at  first  tolerated,  this  no  more  rendered  the 
extirpation  of  it  impossible,  than  the  toleration,  and  even  estab- 
lishment of  paganism  in  the  Roman  empire  rendered  the  extirpa- 
tion of  that  impossible,  or  than  the  toleration  of  Mohammedanism 
in  Spain  precluded  the  possibility  of  the  extirpation  of  that. 

5.  The  doctrine  of  the  Trinity  is  absurd  and  incredible. 

Answer.  That  God  should  in  one  respect  be  one,  and  in  an- 
other respect  three,  is  nothing  absurd  or  inconsistent,  though  in- 
deed we  cannot  comprehend  it.  That  we  cannot  clearly  con- 
ceive of  the  tri-unity  of  Deity,  no  more  disproves  it,  than  our  in- 
ability to  conceive  clearly  of  the  divine  nature  or  existence,  dis- 
proves that  nature  or  existence. 

6.  The  institutions  of  Moses  are  irrational  and  absurd. 
Answer.  This  is  not  granted,  and  must  be  proved  before  it  can 

be  admitted.  We  contend,  that  they  are  by  no  means  absurd, 
but  that  they  subserve  various  important  uses.  Indeed,  it  is  to 
be  supposed,  that  the  opinions  of  depraved  men  would  be  very 
different  concerning  the  most  rational  modes  of  divine  worship  ; 
and  some  make  this  objection  to  the  institutions  of  the  gospel,  and 
doubtless  would,  to  all  institutions,  which  can  possibly  be  made. 

7.  The  mysteries  of  scripture  render  it  incredible.  A  revela- 
tion of  mysteries  is  no  revelation. 

Answer.  The  mysteries  of  scripture,  so  long  as  God  is  infinite 
and  mysterious,  are  so  far  from  a  ground  of  objection  to  its  truth, 
that  they  are  an  argument  in  favor  of  it ;  and  if  there  were  no 
mysteries  in  scripture,  that  circumstance  would  be  a  full  demon- 
stration, that  it  is  no  revelation  of  the  nature,  attributes,  mode  of 
subsistence,  will,  works  and  designs  of  God.  So  long  as  God  is 
infinite  and  mysterious,  a  revelation  concerning  God,  must  con- 
tain mysteries.  Nor  is  it  true,  that  a  revelation  of  mysteries  is 
no  revelation.  The  incarnation  of  Christ  is  a  mystery,  yet  the 
revelation  of  it  is  a  revelation  of  an  important  truth. 

8.  The  believers  in  Christianity  differ  so  widely  in  opinion  con- 


520  DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS. 

cerning  the  contents  of  scripture,  that  it  seems  nothing  is  to  be 
known  by  it,  and  therefore  it  is  no  revelation. 

Answer.  The  different  opinions  of  christians  concerning  the 
truths  of  revelation,  no  more  prove  that  it  is  no  revelation,  than 
the  different  opinions  of  deists  concerning  the  various  duties  of 
the  law  of  nature  prove,  that  there  is  no  such  law ;  or  than  the 
difTerent  opinions  of  lawyers  concerning  the  civil  law  prove,  that 
there  is  no  civil  law.  The  truth  is,  that  the  minds,  capacities, 
passions,  educations,  and  prepossessions  of  men  are  so  different, 
that  it  is  very  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  give  any  revelation  as 
large  as  the  scripture,  and  relating  to  such  a  variety  of  doctrines 
and  facts  ;  concerning  many  parts  of  which  men  would  not  form 
different  opinions. 

9.  The  prophecies  of  scripture  were  either  written  after  the 
events,  or  are  so  vague  as  to  answer  to  various  events,  according 
to  the  various  imaginations  of  men. 

Answer.  There  are  many  prophecies,  concerning  which  this 
cannot  be  pretended  ;  as  those  of  the  antichristian  apostacy,  of 
the  decline  of  the  antichristian  power,  of  the  fall  of  the  heathen 
Roman  empire,  and  of  the  contiuance  of  the  Jews  as  a  distinct 
people.  Nor  are  these  promises  so  vague  as  to  admit  of  various 
applications. 

10.  The  apostles  and  first  founders  of  Christianity,  were  actua- 
ted by  the  motives  of  ambition,  as  Mohammed,  Manco  Capac,  and 
the  founders  of  other  religions.  They  expected  to  be  the  heads 
of  a  large  body  of  followers,  and  thereby  became  famous. 

Answer.  The  apostles  either  believed  the  wonderful  facts  which 
they  relate,  or  they  did  not.  They  could  not  believe  that  they 
saw  Jesus,  and  conversed  with  him  for  forty  days,  and  finally  saw 
him  ascend  to  Heaven,  or  saw  him  in  his  transfiguration,  unless 
they  really  did  see  these  things.  Therefore,  if  they  believed  these 
facts,  they  really  existed  ;  and  then  the  gospel  is  true.  If,  on 
the  other  hand,  they  did  not  believe  those  facts  on  which  the 
gospel  is  founded,  however  great  their  ambition  might  be,  they 
took  the  most  direct  way  to  fail  of  its  gratification,  to  be  convict- 
ed of  the  most  palpable  falsehood,  to  be  loaded  with  shame  in- 
stead of  honor,  and  to  be  forever  prevented  from  establishing  a 
party.  All  this  might  have  been  done  by  disproving  the  facts 
which  they  alleged,  which  might  most  easily  have  been  done,  if 
they  were  mere  fictions,  as  they  were  reported  to  be  done  in  the 
most  public  manner,  and  on  the  most  public  occasions ;  as  turn- 
ing water  into  wine  at  a  public  wedding ;  the  raising  of  Lazarus 
before  a  collection  of  the  Jews  on  the  occasion ;  the  raising  of 
the  son  of  the  widow  of  Nain,  in  a  like  public  manner ;  the  first 


DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS.  521 

gift  of  tongues  at  the  Pentecost ;  and  even  the  resurrection  of 
Christ. 

How  easy  to  have  proved  that  the  story  of  the  raising  of  Laz- 
arus was  a  mere  fiction.  How  easy  to  have  proved  that  the  apos- 
tles, at  pentecost,  were  not  heard  to  speak  various  languages  pub- 
licly. How  easy  to  have  proved  that  there  was  no  earthquake  at 
the  time  of  the  asserted  resurrection  of  Christ.  And  if  the  priests 
and  rulers  believed  the  story  of  the  soldiers,  and  of  the  stealing 
of  the  body  by  the  disciples,  what  is  the  reason  that  there  was 
no  search  made  for  it  ?  Tiiis  circumstance  disproves  the  story. 
Not  to  mention  the  absurdity  of  the  soldiers  undertaking  to  tes- 
tify what  was  done,  while  they  were  asleep.  The  utmost  that 
they  could  say,  was,  that  they  fell  into  a  sleep  ;  that  until  they  fell 
into  this  sleep  the  body  was  safe  in  the  sepulchre  ;  but  when  they 
awoke,  it  was  gone  ;  and  that  they  inferred,  that  the  disciples  had 
stolen  it.  If  they  had  really  stolen  it,  it  might,  doubtless,  in  the 
time  of  it,  have  been  made  to  appear  at  least  probable,  if  not  certain, 
from  various  circumstances,  as  by  the  tracks  of  men,  at  the  sepul- 
chre, in  coming  to  it,  and  in  departing  from  it ;  by  the  marks  of 
their  exertion  in  rolling  away  the  stone  from  the  mouth  of  the 
sepulchre  ;  and  by  their  absconding  immediately  afterward,  to 
escape  conviction  and  punishment.  "  The  wicked  flee,  when 
no  man  pursueth."'  It  is,  therefore,  incredible,  that  if  the  disci- 
ples had  stolen  the  body  of  Jesus,  they  should  all  remain  at  Jeru- 
salem, and  appear  publicly  on  all  occasions,  as  before.  Equally 
incredible  is  it,  that  there  should  not  be  even  the  attempt  to  con- 
vict them  of  it.  Surely  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees  were  not 
wanting  in  a  disposition  for  it.  If  there  were  no  earthquake  at 
or  about  the  time  of  the  alleged  resurrection,  this,  as  observed 
before,  might  easily  have  been  proved,  and  that  would  have  over- 
thrown the  whole  account  of  the  apostles,  or  at  least  have  gone 
very  far  toward  it.  If  there  were  an  earthquake,  it  was  either 
before  the  alleged  resurrection,  after  it,  or  at  the  very  time  of  it. 
If  it  were  before,  is  it  probable  that  the  soldiers  would  be  so  un- 
aflfected  by  it,  as  to  fall  into  a  deep  sleep  soon  after  it  ?  Besides,  the 
soldiers  would  have  been  able,  directly,  to  contradict  the  account 
of  the  apostles,  and  might  have  united  in  testifying,  that  the  body 
was  secure  in  the  sepulchre,  until  such  time  after  the  earthquake, 
that  they  were  entirely  over  the  surprise  which  they  felt  from  the 
earthquake,  and  were  fallen  into  a  sound  sleep.  Or  if  the  earth- 
quake was  after  the  alleged  resurrection,  still  they  would  be  able  to 
contradict  the  apostle's  account  of  its  being,  at  the  time,  or  imme- 
diately before  the  resurrection.  Nor  is  this  all ;  if  the  soldiers  found 
that  the  body  was  missing  before  the  earthquake,  why  did  they  not 


522  DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS. 

immediately  give  notice,  that  pursuit  and  search  might  be  im- 
mediately made,  and  the  body  recovered  ?  If  it  be  said,  that  the 
earthquake  happened  at  the  very  instant  of  the  alleged  resurrection  ; 
on  the  supposition,  that  there  was  no  resurrection,  but  that  the  body 
was  stolen  away  by  the  disciples,  the  earthquake  was  at  the  very 
time  at  which  the  disciples  were  taking  the  body  out  of  the  sepul- 
chre. Therefore,  at  this  time  the  soldiers  were  either  awake  or 
asleep.  If  they  were  awake,  they  could,  and  doubtless  would, 
have  prevented  the  proceeding  of  the  disciples.  Besides,  this 
supposition  is  contrary  to  their  own  account  of  the  matter,  that 
the  body  was  stolen  away  while  they  slept.  If  the  soldiers  were 
asleep  immediately  before  the  earthquake,  doubtless  that  did 
awaken  them,  and  then  being  awake,  they  might  have  prevented 
the  carrying  away  of  the  body,  etc.  There  is  but  one  other  pos- 
sible supposition,  and  that  is,  that  the  soldiers  slept  so  long,  that 
the  disciples  had  time  to  come  and  carry  off  the  body,  and  that 
when  they  were  gone  off  with  it,  an  earthquake  happened,  which, 
of  course,  must  have  awakened  the  soldiers.  Still,  in  this  case, 
the  soldiers  could  have  directly  contradicted  the  account  of  the 
apostles,  that  the  earthquake  preceded  the  resurrection,  and  by 
it,  and  by  the  consequent  appearance  of  an  angel,  the  "keepers 
did  shake,  and  become  as  dead  men."  They  could  have  testi- 
fied, that  so  far  from  this,  by  the  earthquake  they  were  awakened 
out  of  a  sound  sleep  ;  and  that,  as  to  the  angel,  they  saw  nothing 
of  him. 

11.  That  the  Jev^^s  remain  a  distinct  nation  to  this  day,  may 
be  accounted  for  from  their  peculiar  customs  of  circumcision,  not 
intermarrying  with  other  nations,  etc. 

Answer.  But  how  comes  it  to  pass,  that  the  Jews  are  thus  pe- 
culiarly tenacious  of  their  own  customs  ?  This  is  the  very  diffi- 
culty to  be  accounted  for.  Other  nations  have  had  their  pecu- 
liar customs,  and  were,  for  a  while,  tenacious  of  them  ;  yet  have 
long  since  given  them  up,  and  conformed  to  the  customs  of  other 
nations.  The  Greeks  and  Romans  were  wont  to  eat  their  meals, 
reclining  upon  a  couch  on  one  elbow ;  they  had  their  gods,  and 
believed,  that  their  personal  and  national  prosperity  depended  on 
their  observance  of  their  religious  rites,  their  omens  and  libations, 
and  that  these  rites  were  of  divine  authority.  Yet  they  have 
long  since  lost  all  peculiarities,  and  lost  all  existence  as  distinct 
nations.  Nor  were  the  Jews  or  Israelites  always  tenacious  of 
their  peculiar  customs.  They  neglected  circumcision  for  forty 
years  in  the  wilderness.  And  even  after  their  return  from  the 
Babylonish  captivity,  they  intermarried  with  the  neighboring  na- 
tions.    Why  do  they  not  fall  into  the  same  practice  now  ? 


DEISTlC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS.  523 

12.  The  reason  why  Christianity  so  prevailed  in  the  first  age, 
is,  that  the  idea  that  the  world  was  nearly  at  an  end,  was  then 
very  prevalent,  and  many  were  greatly  aftVighted  in  that  expec- 
tation. 

Ansiver.  That  expectation  would  influence  no  man  to  become 
a  christian,  unless  he  was  convinced  that  Christianity  was  the 
truth.  No  man  who  expects  the  end  of  the  world^  shortly  will, 
to  prepare  for  it,  embrace  a  system  of  religion  which  he  believes 
to  be  false.  That  expectation  would  indeed  naturally  set  men  to 
inquire,  what  is  true  religion,  and  what  is  the  best  way  to  prepare 
for  our  end  ;  and  the  result  of  such  inquiry  would  be  to  embrace 
that  religion  which,  to  the  inquirer,  appears  to  be  the  truth  or  the 
nearest  to  it.  How  came  those,  who,  by  their  expectation  of 
the  end  of  the  world,  were  excited  to  inquire  after  true  religion, 
to  embrace  Christianity  ?  The  answer  must  be,  that  there  ap- 
peared to  them  convincing  evidence  of  its  truth.  And  surely 
the  fact,  that  to  the  most  serious,  diligent  and  conscientious  in- 
quirers after  true  religion,  who  lived  in  the  first  age,  when  the  facts 
on  which  Christianity  is  founded,  were  recent  and  well  known,  or 
easily  capable  of  being  ascertained  or  disproved  ;  and  who  inquir- 
ed after  the  truth  in  the  immediate  prospect  of  the  end  of  the 
world,  and  of  their  appearance  at  the  bar  of  God  ;  Christianity 
appeared  to  be  supported  by  sufficient  evidence,  so  that  they  em- 
braced it  as  the  only  preparative  for  the  judgment ;  is  no  presump- 
tive argument  against  the  truth  of  Christianity,  but  a  strong  pre- 
sumption in  its  favor. 

Why  did  not  the  christians  of  that  day,  who  shortly  expected 
the  end  of  the  world  renounce  Christianity  and  embrace  pagan- 
ism, that  thereby  they  might  be  prepared  for  the  judgment  ?  The 
answer  must  be,  that  paganism  did  not  appear  to  them  to  be  the 
true  religion.  It  is  presumed  that  there  never  was  an  instance, 
in  any  age,  of  a  person  renouncing  Christianity  and  embracing 
another  religion,  or  any  scheme  of  infidelity,  to  prepare  him  for 
death  or  the  end  of  the  world.  But  there  are  instances  in  every 
age  of  infidels,  who,  in  the  prospect  of  death,  have  thought  them- 
selves utterly  unsafe  in  their  infidelity,  and  have  embraced  Chris- 
tianity, or  at  least  have  professed  their  conviction  of  the  necessi- 
ty of  it  to  a  preparation  for  death. 

13.  There  is  no  need  of  the  gospel  or  of  any  revelation.  The 
perfect  goodness  of  God  ensures  to  us  future  happiness. 

Ansiver.  To  make  the  goodness  of  God  a  rational  ground  of 
expectation  of  future  happiness,  we  must  have  evidence,  1 .  That 
he  is  perfectly  good  ;  2.  That  the  general  good  does  not  forbid 
that  we  be   made  happy  in  the  future  v.-orld  ;  3.  That  we  shall 


524  DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,  WITH  ANSWERS. 

attain  to  future  happiness,  either  unconditionally,  or  on  such  con- 
ditions, as  we  do  or  may  easily  comply  with. 

1.  We  must  have  evidence  that  God  is  perfectly  good.  But 
what  evidence  of  this  has  the  infidel  ?  The  christian  is  assured 
of  this  by  revelation  ;  not  only  by  its  positive  declarations,  but  by 
its  whole  scheme,  by  the  contents  and  tendency  of  the  law  of  the 
gospel,  and  of  the  whole  bible.  It  all  tends  to  infuse  and  promote 
holiness  and  goodness.  But  the  infidel  has  no  evidence  of  the 
divine  goodness  from  these  sources.  All  he  knows  concerning 
God  is,  by  what  he  has  done  in  the  works  of  creation  and  provi- 
dence. When  he  attends  to  these,  he  finds,  that  he  has  made  a 
world,  partly  filled  with  good,  and  partly  with  evil.  Therefore 
Hume,  the  most  acute  of  infidels,  asserts,  that  the  only  legitimate 
consequence  to  be  drawn  from  such  premises  is,  that  the  author 
of  the  world  is  partly  good  and  pardy  evil.  And  Doctor  Frank- 
lin, of  whom  infidels  plume  themselves  much,  informs  us,  that  as 
God  had  given  him  a  good  lot  in  this  world,  he  doubts  not  he  will 
give  him  as  good  a  one  in  the  future  world.  All  this  implies,  that 
on  the  principles  of  infidelity,  nothing  better  is  to  be  expected  in 
the  future  state  than  we  enjoy  in  the  present.  Therefore  as  we 
are  very  far  from  entire  happiness  in  this  world,  we  have  no  rea- 
son to  expect  it  in  the  world  to  come.  And  as  we  have,  on  these 
principles,  no  evidence  of  the  perfect  goodness  of  God,  we  have 
no  right  to  suppose  that  goodness,  or  to  infer  from  the  supposi- 
tion of  it,  that  we  shall  be  happy. 

Thomas  Paine  tells  us,  "  I  believe  in  one  God,  and  no  more  ; 
and  I  hope  for  happiness  beyond  this  life.^^  It  seems  then,  that 
he  is  uncertain  about  it ;  he  barely  hopes  for  it.  Nor  does  he 
give  any  of  us  an  assurance  of  it,  on  his  principles.  What  encour- 
agement then  have  we  to  embrace  his  principles,  which  leave  us 
in  such  an  important  matter  to  bar's  hopes  ?  Especially  what  rea- 
son have  we  to  renounce  Christianity  which  gives  us  absolute  as- 
surance of  future  happiness  to  embrace  Mr.  Paine's  system,  which 
gives  bare  hopes  of  it  ?  This  would  be  a  very  unequal  exchange. 
But  on  what  ground  does  Mr.  Paine  "  hope  for  happiness  beyond 
this  life  ?"  Has  he  any  reason  for  liis  hope  ?  Or  is  it  a  mere  fond 
imagination  ?  I  do  not  find  that  he  has  given  any  reason  in  his 
publications.  Why  he  did  not  give  us  his  reason  or  reasons  ; 
whether  it  was  because  he  was  conscious,  that  he  had  none  to 
give ;  or  whether  he  had  not  studied  his  subject  so  far  as  to  dis- 
cover, that  on  his  principles  no  reason  was  to  be  given  for  it,  I 
will  not  decide.  But  I  presume  he  will  not  venture  to  give  the 
same  reason  for  his  hope  that  Dr.  Franklin  gave  for  his.  What- 
ever may  be  said  of  the  Doctor's  lot  in  this  world,  Mr.  Paine 


DEISTIC  OBJECTIONS,   WITH  ANSWERS.  525 

surely  has  no  reason  to  boast  of  the  goodness  of  his.  Whatever 
popularity  he  might  once  have  enjoyed,  both  in  America  and 
France,  it  was  very  short  lived  in  both  countries ;  in  the  latter, 
after  a  long  imprisonment,  he  did  but  just  escape  the  guillotine, 
and  is  now  like  to  end  his  days  in  a  manner  grievously  mortify- 
ing to  his  ambition.  And  that  good  God,  who,  in  the  course  of 
his  ])rovidence,  has  suflered  so  many  sore  calamities  to  befal  Mr. 
Paine  in  this  world,  may  sufl'er  as  great  evils  to  befal  him  in  the 
future  world  ;  he  who  brought  him  into  prison,  and  so  near  to  the 
guillotine,  may  cause  him  to  feel  the  force  of  that,  or  some  more 
dreadful  instrument  of  punishment  in  the  future  world.  In  short, 
until  Mr.  Paine,  or  any  other  infidel,  shall  be  able,  on  his  own 
princij)les,  to  demonstrate  the  perfect  goodness  of  God,  he  has  no 
reason  to  expect,  that  in  the  future  world  he  shall  be  treated 
more  favorably  than  the  scriptures  represent  concerning  the 
wicked. 

2.  Supposing  the  perfect  goodness  of  God,  could  on  the  princi- 
ples of  infidelity,  be  demonstrated,  still,  to  make  tliat  goodness  a 
just  ground  of  the  expectation  of  happiness  in  the  future  world,  we 
must  have  evidence,  that  the  general  good  does  not  stand  in  the 
way  of  that  happiness,  or  does  not  require  our  misery.  Though 
God  is  indeed  perfectly  good,  yet,  in  this  life  we  suffer  various 
miseries.  This,  doubtless  is,  because  God  sees  that  the  general 
good  requires  it.  Otherwise  the  dispensation  cannot  be  reconciled 
with  perfect  goodness.  And  as  the  general  good  requires  our 
misery  here,  how  do  we  know  but  that  it  may  require  it  hereafter. 

3.  That  we  may  rationally  trust  to  the  goodness  of  God  for 
future  happiness,  and  feel  ourselves  safe  in  that  trust,  we  must 
know  whether  we  are  to  attain  to  future  happiness  uncondition- 
ally ;  or,  otherwise,  what  the  condition  or  conditions  are,  and  must 
also  know,  that  we  comply  with  the  conditions.  That  we  all,  in 
some  instances  at  least,  deviate  from  the  line  pointed  out  to  us, 
even  by  the  law  of  nature  and  reason,  I  presume  infidels  them- 
selves will  acknowledge.  Then  arises  the  question.  Will  the  au- 
thor of  nature,  and  of  the  law  of  nature,  pass  by  with  impunity, 
all  our  violations  of  his  law,  even  though  we  persist  in  them  ?  Or, 
if  it  be  said,  that  repentance  and  reformation  are  necessary  to  the 
favor  of  the  Deity  and  to  future  happiness  ;  the  question  will 
arise,  what  degree  of  repentance  and  reformation  are  necessary  ? 
Must  our  subsequent  obedience  be  entire  and  perfect  ?  Or,  shall 
we  be  entitled  to  future  happiness  by  an  imperfect  obedience  ? 
That  the  man  who  imperfectly  repents  and  obeys,  is  entitled  to 
future  happiness  requires  proof,  before  it  can  be  rationally  or 
safely  believed.     The  penitent  is  in  this  life  equally  liable  to  ca- 

VoL.  II.  45 


526  SIBIILITUDE  OF  ADAm's  TRANSGRESSION. 

lamity  as  the  rest  of  men.  And  as  the  general  good,  and  therefore 
the  divine  goodness  do  require,  that  he  suffer  calamity  and  misery 
here,  they  may,  for  aught  appears,  require  the  same  hereafter. 
Nay,  if  the  general  good  without  an  atonement,  and  viewing  the 
penitent  in  his  own  character  merely,  do  not  require  him  to  be 
punished,  it  is  not  just  that  he  should  be  punished  for  the  rules 
of  justice  in  this  case,  are  determined  by  the  requirements  of  the 
general  good.  What  is  a  just  punishment  of  any  crime  but  a 
punishment,  which,  in  view  of  the  crime  only,  is  requisite  to  re- 
pair the  damage  done  to  the  system  by  that  crime  ?  Now,  if  the 
system  or  the  good  of  it  in  view  of  the  conduct  of  the  penitent 
sinner  only,  do  not  require  that  he  be  punished,  it  is  not  just  that 
he  be  punished.  Of  course,  justice  requires  that  he  pass  with  im- 
punity, and  he  is  incapable  of  pardon  ;  nay,  in  the  violation  of 
the  divine  law,  there  is  no  moral  evil. 

I  wish  to  make  a  further  observation  concerning  the  foremen- 
tioned  idea  of  Doctor  Franklin,  that  because  God  gave  him 
a  good  lot  in  this  world,  he  doubted  not  that  he  would  give 
him  as  good  a  one  in  the  future.  This  goes  on  the  ground,  that 
every  man  is  to  be  dealt  with  in  the  future  world  just  as  he  is  in 
this  ;  that  those  who  are  most  prosperous  in  this  world,  will  be 
most  prosperous  in  the  future  ;  and  those  who  meet  with  the  great- 
est trials  and  afflictions  in  this  world,  will  be  most  wretched  in 
the  future.  Now,  would  Dr.  Franklin  avow  this  ?  Would  he 
maintain,  that  the  man  who,  from  his  infancy,  is  possessed  of  a 
feeble  constitution,  and  spends  his  days  in  pain,  poverty  and 
contempt,  though  ever  so  strictly  just,  and  cordially  benevolent ; 
and  the  man  of  the  same  amiable  character,  who  from  a  compe- 
tency, is,  by  the  fraud  and  oppression  of  his  rich  neighbor,  re- 
duced to  poverty  and  distress,  and  is  in  various  ways  through  his 
whole  life,  rendered  miserable  by  his  said  neighbor,  now  become 
inveterately  malicious  toward  him  because  he  himself  has  injured 
him  ;  will  be  more  miserable  in  the  future  world,  than  any  of 
those  who  live  and  die  in  prosperity,  dissipation  and  vice  ? 


OF  SINNING  NOT  AFTER  THE  SIMILITUDE  OF  ADAM'S 
TRANSGRESSION. 

"  I  also  will  show  mine  opinion."  An  exhibition  of  various 
opinions,  with  the  reasons  on  which  they  are  founded,  may  lead 
to  real  improvement ;  and  as  this  exhibition  may  be  made  in  the 
Theological  Magazine,  without  offence,  provided  it  be  done  can- 


SIMILITUDE  OF   AUAm's  TRANSGRESSION.  527 

didly  and  with  proper  temper  ;  for  this  reason,  as  well  as  others, 
I  conceive  it  to  be  a  useful  work.  It  has  long  been  a  subject  of 
inquiry,  what  the  apostle  means,  Rom.  5:  14,  by  ''  them  that  had 
not  sinned  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgression."  A  writ- 
er in  the  Theological  Magazine,  vol.  ii.  p.  147,  supposes,  "that 
all  who  commit  outward  acts  of  wickedness,  do  sin  after  the 
similitude  of  Adam's  transgression  ;  and  they,  and  they  only, 
whose  wickedness  is  visible  only  to  God,  do  not  sin  alter  this  sim- 
ilitude." Yet  this  author's  opinion  is,  that  the  apostle  in  this 
passage  n.eant  infants.  But  do  all  except  infants  commit  out- 
ward acts  of  wickedness  visible  to  men  ?  Perhaps  this  may  be 
difficult  to  be  proved.  Even  the  scribes  and  pharisees  were 
"  whited  sepulchres,  which  appeared  beautiful  to  men  ;"  they 
"made  clean  the  outside  of  the  cup  and  of  the  platter;"  they 
"  appeared  righteous  to  men,"  Matt,  xxiii.  Besides,  if  it  be  the 
meaning  of  the  apostle  in  Rom.  5:  14,  that  death  reigned  over 
infants,  why  does  he  observe  that  it  reignedy/'owi  Adam  to  Mo- 
ses ?  It  has  reigned  over  them  from  Adam  to  the  present  time, 
as  well  as  from  Adam  to  Moses. 

I  therefore  beg  leave  to  propose  another  sense  of  the  expression, 
"  sinning  not  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgression  ;"  which 
is  this,  sinni7ig  not  against  a  revealed  laic.  Adam  sinned 
against  a  revealed  law  ;  so  did  the  Israelites  after  Moses.  But 
from  Adam  to  Moses  there  was  no  standing  revealed  law.  Yet 
all  mankind,  during  that  period,  died,  and  their  death  proved  that 
sin  was  imputed  to  them,  or  that  they  were  sinners.  But  they 
did  not  sin  against  any  revealed  law,  as  Adam  did,  or  as  they  did 
who  lived  under  the  law  of  Moses.  In  this  respect,  therefore, 
they  did  not  sin  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgression. 

I  am  sensible  that  this  is  a  sense  of  the  text,  different  from  what 
is  commonly  put  upon  it.  The  common  construction  implies, 
that  infants  are  those  who  have  not  sinned  after  the  similitude  of 
Adam's  transgression.  It  is  commonly  said  that  they  have  not 
sinned  by  any  personal  act  as  Adam  did,  but  by  imputation  of 
Adam's  sin.  Now  the  imputation  or  transfer  of  Adam's  sin  to 
another  person,  does  not  imply,  that  the  other  person  sins  at  all 
in  the  active  voice ;  yet  the  text  speaks  of  those  who  have  in  the 
active  voice  sinned  not  after  the  similitude  of  Adam's  transgres- 
sion. 

The  apostle's  argument  does  not  seem  to  lead  him  to  say  any- 
thing concerning  infants.  They  are  not  mentioned  in  the  con- 
text. What  right  then  have  we  to  suppose,  without  necessity, 
that  he  abruptly  and  obscurely  introduces  them  ? 


528  THE  SOUL  IN  THE 


THE  SOUL  IN  THE  INTERMEDIATE  STATE. 

That  the  soul  is  in  a  state  of  insensibility,  between  death  and 
the  resurrection,  is  the  avowed  opinion  of  some.  In  opposition 
to  this  opinion,  I  take  the  liberty  to  suggest  the  following  texts 
and  observations  on  them. 

2  Cor.  5:  6,  8,  9,  "  Therefore  we  are  always  confident,  know- 
ing, that  whilst  we  are  at  home  in  the  body,  we  are  absent  from 
the  Lord.  We  are  confident,  I  say,  and  willing,  rather  to  be  ab- 
sent from  the  body,  and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord.  Where- 
fore we  labor,  that  whether  present  or  absent,  we  may  be  accept- 
ed of  him."  These  words  inform  us,  that  the  apostle,  and  his 
fellow  apostles  and  christians  of  that  day,  were  willing  to  be  ab- 
sent from  the  body,  and  present  with  the  Lord  ;  and  that  they 
made  it  the  object  of  their  labor,  that  whether  they  should  be  ab- 
sent or  present,  they  might  be  accepted  of  him.  This  clearly 
shows  their  belief,  that  they  might  be  absent  from  the  body,  and 
yet  consciously  present  with  the  Lord.  But  this  is  not  all.  The 
text  further  informs  us,  that  they  were  confident  that  this  would 
be  the  case  with  them  :  "  We  are  confident,  I  say,  and  willing, 
rather  to  be  absent  from  the  body,  and  to  be  present  with  the 
Lord." 

Acts  7:  59,  "  And  they  stoned  Stephen,  calling  upon  God,  and 
saying.  Lord  Jesus,  receive  my  spirit."  If  Stephen  had  believed, 
that  there  was  no  intermediate  or  separate  state,  he  would  doubt- 
less have  expressed  himself  very  differently.  He  would  natural- 
ly have  said,  Lord  Jesus,  receive  me,  or  receive  my  body  and 
spirit,  at  the  resurrection. 

Matt.  1 0:  28,  "  Fear  not  them  which  kill  the  body,  but  are  not 
able  to  kill  the  soul.  But  rather  fear  him,  which  is  able  to  destroy 
both  soul  and  body  in  hell."  Now,  if  the  soul  dies  and  revives 
with  the  body,  what  can  be  the  meaning  of  this  text  ?  In  this 
case,  as  the  life  of  the  soul  depends  on  the  life  of  the  body,  he 
that  is  able  to  kill  the  body,  is  able  to  kill  the  soul  too.  This 
text  seems  necessarily  to  imply,  that  the  soul  will  survive  the 
body. 

Heb.  12:  22,  23,  "But  ye  are  come — to  tlie  spirits  of  just 
men  made  perfect."  Lest  it  should  be  said,  that  these  spirits  of 
just  men  made  perfect,  mean  the  saints  in  the  resurrection  state, 
we  may  observe,  that  the  scriptures  have  explained  their  idea  of 
spirits  very  clearly. 

Jolin  4:  24,  "  God  is  a  spirit,  and  they  that  would  worship  him, 
must  worship  him  in  spirit  and  truth."     It  is  granted,  I  suppose, 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE.  529 

by  those  who  hold  the  opinion  now  opposed,  that  God  is  an  im- 
material being.  By  spirit  then,  the  scriptures  mean  an  immate- 
rial being.     Again, 

Luke  24:  37,  39,  "  But  they  were  terrified,  affrighted,  and  sup- 
posed they  had  seen  a  spirit.  And  he  said  unto  them — be- 
hold my  hands  and  my  feet,  that  it  is  I  myself*.  Handle  me  and 
see  ;  for  a  spirit  hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me  have." 
This  is  a  furtlier  demonstration,  that  the  scriptures,  by  spirit, 
mean  an  immaterial  being  or  substance.  And  that  by  the  spirits 
of  just  men  made  perfect,  cannot  be  intended  the  saints  in  the 
resurrection  state,  appears  from  this,  that  they  then  will  be  no 
more  spirits,  than  the  saints  in  this  world  are,  or  than  our  Lord 
was,  at  the  time  when  he  said,  "  Handle  me  and  see  ;  for  a  spirit 
hath  not  flesh  and  bones,  as  ye  see  me  have." 

2  Peter  1:  13,  14,  "  Yea,  I  think  it  meet,  as  long  as  I  am  with 
you  in  this  tabernacle,  to  stir  you  up,  by  putting  you  in  remem- 
brance, knowing,  that  I  shall  shortly  put  off  this  my  tabernacle, 
even  as  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  hath  showed  me."  Here  the 
apostle  expressly  declares,  that  he  must  shortly  put  off  this  taber- 
nacle ;  i.  e.  be  separated  from  his  body  ;  and  that  the  Lord  had 
shown  it  to  him.  This  would  not  be  true,  if  his  soul  were  to  die 
with  his  body. 

1  Thess.  5:  9,  10,  "  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to  wrath  ;  but 
to  obtain  salvation  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  died  for  us, 
that  whether  we  wake  or  sleep,  we  should  live  together  with  him." 
Waking  and  sleeping  are  commonly  used  in  scripture,  to  signify 
bodily  life  and  death.  Nor  does  it  appear,  that  this  passage  will 
bear  any  other  construction.  If  it  will  not  it  is  a  clear  and  di- 
rect declaration,  that  whether  the  bodies  of  true  christians  be 
dead  or  alive,  their  souls  shall  be  alive,  and  be  with  Christ. 

Phil.  1:  21,  "For  me  to  live  is  Christ,  and  to  die  is  gain.  But 
if  I  live  in  the  flesh,  this  is  the  fruit  of  my  labor ;  yet  what  I  shall 
choose,  I  wot  not.  For  I  am  in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  having  a 
desire  to  depart,  and  be  with  Christ ;  which  is  far  better."  For 
the  apostle  to  die,  could  be  gain  on  no  other  ground,  than  that 
he  was  to  be  in  a  state  of  sensibility  and  happiness  immediately 
after  death.  On  the  supposition,  that  his  soul  died,  or  fell  into 
a  torpor,  at  the  death  of  his  body,  and  was  to  be  revived  with  it 
at  the  resuirection  ;  what  gain  could  he  have  obtained  by  death  at 
that  time,  more  than  if  he  should  have  lived  ten  years  longer  ? 
In  either  case  he  would,  by  the  promises,  be  entitled  to  eternal 
glory  in  the  resurrection-state.  By  dying  at  the  time  he  wrote, 
he  would  lose  all  that  happiness  which  he  might  enjoy,  in  spirit- 
ual exercises,  in  communion  with  God  and  Christ ;  in  being  the 

45* 


530  THE   SOUL  IN  THE 

instrument  of  the  conversion  of  sinners,  and  the  edification  of 
saints,  in  building  up  the  kingdom  of  Christ  in  the  world,  and  in 
any  temporal  good  improved  by  divine  grace.  Therefore,  if  he 
had  died  at  that  time,  he  would  have  been  a  loser,  instead  of 
gainer.  Nor  is  this  all.  By  continuing  in  life,  he  would  have 
made  further  proficiency  in  the  christian  life,  would  have  done 
more  for  the  honor  of  God,  and  for  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  and 
therefore  would  have  been  entitled  by  promise,  to  a  greater  de- 
gree of  happiness  in  the  resurrection  state  ;  and  this  greater  de- 
gree of  happiness  would  have  been  extended  to  all  eternity.  So 
that,  in  reality,  the  apostle  would  have  been  an  infinite  loser  by 
death  at  that  time.  He  would  have  lost  a  certain  degree  of  hap- 
piness, doubtless  equal  to  the  whole  heavenly  happiness  of  some 
saints,  and  this  degree  of  happiness  running  through  eternity, 
would  be  a  sum  of  happiness,  as  truly  infinite  as  the  whole  eter- 
nal happiness  of  some  real  saints.  As,  therefore,  those  saints,  by 
the  loss  of  their  whole  heavenly  happiness,  would  sustain  an  infi- 
nite loss ;  so  would  the  apostle,  if  he  had  lost  that  additional  de- 
gree of  happiness  to  which  he  would  have  been  entitled  by  his 
continued  life  and  usefulness.  We  can  make  nothing  of  this 
text,  but  upon  the  supposition,  that  his  soul  died  not,  or  did  not 
fall  into  a  torpor  with  his  body. 

1  Pet.  3:  1 9,  20,  "  By  which  also  he  went  and  preached  unto 
the  spirits  in  prison,  which  sometime  were  disobedient,  when  once 
the  long  suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the 
ark  was  preparing."  Now,  unless  we  allow  the  soul,  after  the 
death  of  the  body,  to  exist  in  a  state  of  sensibility,  in  what  sense 
can  the  spirits  of  the  sinners  of  the  old  world  be  said  to  be  in 
prison  ?  Their  spirits  were  no  more  in  prison,  than  their  bodies  ; 
or  than  the  spirits  of  the  most  eminent  saints. 

Eccl.  12:  7,  "Then  shall  the  dust  return  unto  the  earth,  as  it 
was  ;  and  the  spirit  shall  return  unto  God  who  gave  it."  How 
can  this  be  reconciled  with  the  doctrine,  that  the  soul  at  death 
falls  into  a  state  of  perfect  insensibility  till  the  resurrection  ?  A 
distinction  is  made  between  the  dust,  the  material  part  of  man, 
and  the  spirit  or  immaterial  part.  The  former  is  said  to  return 
unto  the  earth  ;  the  latter  to  return  unto  God.  But  how  leturn 
to  God  ?  In  a  perfect  stupor,  or  destitution  of  all  thought  and 
sense  ?  This  will  not  be  pretended.  Therefore  it  must  return 
in  a  state  of  sensibility. 

Luke  23:  12,  "And  Jesus  said  unto  him,  verily  I  say  unto 
thee,  to-day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  "paradise."  This  would 
not  be  true,  if  the  soul  of  this  thief  on  the  cross  were  to  be  in  a 
state  of  insensibility  from  death  to  the  resurrection.     If  it  be  said, 


INTERMEDIATE  STATE.  531 

tliat  the  meaning  is,  that  as  the  thief  would  be  conscious  of  no- 
tliing  between  death  and  the  resurrection,  his  being  with  Christ 
at  the  resurrection  would  seem  to  iiim  to  have  been  the  same  day 
on  which  he  died,  or  immediately  after  his  death  ;  I  answer,  this 
woidd  be  to  talk  without  example,  and,  in  a  manner,  not  intelli- 
gible to  mankind  in  general.  Would  it  not  be  unintelligible,  and 
without  example,  to  tell  a  man  who  had  been  a  whole  day  in  a 
sound  sleep,  and  who  was  wholly  ignorant  of  the  time,  which  had 
elapsed  during  his  sleep,  that  it  was  but  a  minute  since  he  had 
fallen  into  sleep  ?  Or  would  there  be  any  propriety  or  truth  in  say- 
ing, that  Lazarus,  who  lay  dead  four  days,  was  raised  on  the  same 
day,  and  even  immediately  after  his  death  ?  Not  an  instance  of 
such  a  use  of  language  can  be  found  in  all  the  scriptures,  nor  in 
any  approved  uninspired  author.  Yet  this  would  have  been  just 
as  true  and  proper,  on  the  ground  of  this  objection,  as  our  Lord's 
telling  the  thief  on  the  cross,  "  To  day  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in 
paradise."  Lazarus,  on  the  hypothesis  now  under  consideration, 
would  no  more  have  perceived  any  time  between  his  death  and 
resurrection,  than  the  thief  would  have  perceived  time  between 
his  death  and  the  general  resurrection. 

Luke  16:  22 — 28,  "  And  it  came  to  pass,  that  the  beggar  died, 
and  was  carried  by  tlie  angels  to  Abraham's  bosom  ;  the  rich  man 
also  died,  and  was  buried.  And  in  hell  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being 
in  torments,  and  seeth  Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  his  bo- 
som ;  and  he  cried,  and  said,  father  Abraham,  have  mercy  on 
me,  and  send  Lazarus,  that  he  may  dip  the  tip  of  his  finger  in 
water,  and  cool  my  tongue  ;  for  I  am  tormented  in  this  flame. 
But  Abraham  said,  son,  remember,  that  thou,  in  thy  life-time  re- 
ceivedst  good  things,  and  likewise  Lazarus  evil  things  ;  but  now  he 
is  comforted,  and  thou  art  tormented.  Then  he  said,  I  pray  thee, 
therefore,  father,  that  thou  wouldst  send  him  to  my  father's  house  ; 
for  I  have  five  brethren  ;  that  he  may  testify  unto  them,  lest  they 
also  come  unto  this  place  of  torment."  This  is  a  very  plain  re- 
presentation, that  Abraham,  Lazarus,  and  the  rich  man,  were  all 
in  a  state  of  existence  and  sensibility,  between  death  and  the  re- 
surrection, and  while  the  brethren  of  this  rich  man  were  still  in 
this  life.  Therefore  their  souls  did  not  die,  nor  fall  into  a  torpor 
at  death.  I  know  it  is  said,  that  this  is  a  parabolical  representa- 
tion. I  grant  it ;  but  parabolical  representations  are  designed  to 
teach  truth,  and  not  falsehood.  Now,  unless  this  parable  does 
teach  direct  falsehood,  the  souls  of  Abraham,  Lazarus  and  the 
rich  man  were  in  existence  and  sensibility  in  a  state  of  separa- 
tion from  their  bodies  ;  and,  by  parity  of  reason,  this  is  true  of  all 
mankind. 


532  THE  SOUL  IN  THE  INTERMEDIATE   STATE. 

Several  representations  in  the  book  of  the  Revelation  teach  us, 
that  the  dead,  especially  the  dead  saints,  are  in  a  state  of  sensi- 
bility between  death  and  the  resurrection. 

Chap.  5:  9,  10,  "  And  they  sung  a  new  song,  saying,  Thou  art 
worthy  to  take  tlie  book,  and  to  open  the  seals  thereof;  for  thou 
wast  slain,  and  hast  redeemed  us  to  God,  by  thy  blood,  out  of 
every  kindred  and  tongue,  and  people  and  nation,  and  hast  made 
us,  unto  our  God,  kings  and  priests  ;  and  we  shall  reign  on  the 
earthJ'^  The  persons  here  speaking,  are  saints  redeemed  from 
among  men  ;  the  place  in  which  they  were  seen  and  heard  by 
the  apostle  to  sing  this  song,  was  heaven,  as  is  manifest  by  the 
preceding  context,  and  by  chap.  4:  4,  6.  And  the  time  was  mani- 
festly before  the  resurrection,  because  it  is  said  in  the  words  them- 
selves, "We  shall  reign  on  the  earth."  These  words,  whether 
we  believe  the  reign  of  the  saints  on  the  earth  to  be  before  or  im- 
mediately after  the  general  resurrection,  prove,  that  the  time  at 
which  they  were  spoken  was  before  the  resurrection.  Also,  it  is 
manifest,  from  the  text  taken  with  the  context,  that  the  time  of 
singing  this  song,  was  at  the  time  of  the  Lamb's  taking  the  book 
sealed  with  seven  seals,  and  previous  to  the  opening  of  them, 
i.  e.  previous  to  the  great  events  and  dispensations  of  providence 
concerning  the  christian  church. 

Chap.  6:  9,  10,  "And  when  he  had  opened  the  fifth  seal,  I 
saw  under  the  altar  the  souls  of  them  that  were  slain  for  the  word 
of  God,  and  for  the  testimony  which  they  held.  And  they  cried 
with  a  loud  voice,  saying.  How  long,  O  Lord,  holy  and  true,  dost 
thou  not  avenge  our  blood  on  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth." 
On  these  words  we  may  observe,  that  the  apostle  has  a  vision 
of  the  souls  of  the  martyred  saints  pleading  for  vengeance.  But,  on 
the  supposition,  that  the  souls  of  all  men  at  death,  fall  into  perfect 
insensibility,  they  no  more  plead  for  vengeance  than  their  bodies 
do.  That  this  pleading  of  the  martyrs  for  vengeance  on  their 
enemies,  is  before  the  general  resurrection,  is  implied  in  the  na- 
ture of  the  case  ;  for,  after  that  resurrection,  full  vengeance  will 
be  executed  on  those  enemies,  and  there  will  be  no  occasion, 
that  the  saints  should  plead  for  vengeance.  Besides,  this  plead- 
ing was  under  the  fifth  seal,  and  immediately  on  tlie  opening  of 
it.  But  several  other  seals,  trumpets  and  vials  followed  this  seal, 
before  the  resurrection. 

Chap.  7:  13,  to  the  end;  "And  one  of  the  elders  answered, 
saying  unto  me,  what  are  these,  which  are  arrayed  in  white 
robes  ?  Whence  came  they  ?  And  I  said  unto  him.  Sir,  thou 
knowest.  And  he  said  unto  me,  these  are  they  which  came  out 
of  great  tribulation,  and  have  washed  their  robes,  and  made  them 


SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS.  533 

white  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb.  Therefore  are  they  before  the 
throne  of  God,  and  serve  him  day  and  night  in  his  temple,"  etc. 
That  this  is  a  representation  of  what  was  to  take  place  before 
the  resurrection,  is  manifest  from  this,  that  it  was  under  the  sixth 
seal,  and  before  the  oj)ening  of  the  seventh  ;  and  the  events  of 
the  seventh  seal  will  be  accomplished  before  the  resurrection. 
But  in  this  same  scene,  taking  place  thus  before  the  resurrection, 
the  inspired  apostle  saw  those  who  had  come  out  of  great  tribu- 
lation, and  who  had  washed  their  robes,  and  made  them  white 
in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  standing  before  the  throne  of  God, 
and  serving  him  day  and  night  in  his  temple  ;  which  implies  both 
existence  and  sensibility. 

Chap.  14:  13,  "  And  I  heard  a  voice  from  heaven,  saying  unto 
me,  write.  Blessed  are  the  dead  which  die  in  the  Lord,  from 
henceforth  saith  the  spirit,  that  they  may  rest  from  their  labors, 
and  their  works  do  follow  them."  These  blessed  persons  were 
the  dead,  and  not  those  who  are  raised  from  the  dead  ;  for  these 
last  are  alive.  And  they,  dead  as  they  are,  are  said  to  rest  from 
their  labors,  and  their  works  are  said  to  follow  them  ;  i.  e.  the  ef- 
fects of  their  works  follow  them,  in  that  they  receive  the  reward  of 
them.  But  this  could  not  be  truly  said  of  them  if  they  were  in  a 
state  of  insensibility,  and  were  dead  in  both  soul  and  body. 

I  know  not  how  to  reconcile  these  sacred  passages,  with  a 
torpid  state  of  all  souls  from  death  to  the  general  resurrection. 


SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS. 

1.  "  What  is  the  amount  of  all  his  prayers,  but  an  attempt  to 
make  the  Almighty  change  his  mind,  and  act  otherwise  than  he 
does.  It  is  as  if  he  were  to  say,  thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  J." 
— Thomas  Paine. 

This,  according  to  Mr.  Paine,  is  the  amount  of  all  prayers  to 
the  Deity.  But  he  tells  us,  that  "  he  hopes  for  happiness  be- 
yond this  life."  Therefore  he  is  not  sure  of  it,  he  barely  hopes 
for  it,  and  thinks  it  "  probable."  And  how  does  he  hope  to  at- 
tam  to  that  happiness  ?  Doubtless,  by  the  gift  of  that  "  one  God," 
in  whose  existence  he  professes  a  belief.  And  if  he  should  pray 
that  one  God  to  bestow  tliis  gift  upon  him,  which  he  is  not  sure 
that  lie  will,  would  Mr.  Paine  herein  tell  the  Almighty,  "  thou 
knowest  not  so  well  as  I  ?"  Mr.  Paine  tells  us,  "  I  believe  that 
religious  duties  consist  in  doing  justice,  loving  mercy,  and  endea- 
voring to  make  our  fellow  creatures  happy."     It  is  then,  ac- 


534  SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS. 

/ 

cording  to  him,  a  religious  duty  to  endeavor  to  make  our  fellow- 
creatures  more  happy  than  God  has  made  them.  And  is  not  this 
as  really  saying  to  God,  "  thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  I,"  as  it 
would  be  to  pray  God.  that  he  would  permit  and  assist  us  to  ac- 
complish the  happiness  of  others,  which  is,  or  ought  to  be  the  ob- 
ject of  our  endeavor  ?  When  Mr.  Paine  published  his  Age  of 
Reason,  he  doubtless  did  it  to  instruct  his  fellow  creatures,  i.  e. 
to  communicate  more  instruction  to  them  than  God  had  commu- 
nicated. But  what  is  this,  on  his  principle,  but  saying,  "  thou 
knowest  not  so  well  as  I,"  how  much  instruction  men  ought 
to  have  ?  Whenever  Mr.  Paine  spoke,  or  had  his  speech 
read,  in  the  National  Convention,  it  was  doubtless  to  give  some 
information,  or  to  persuade  the  Convention  to  adopt  some  mea- 
sure which  it  had  not  adopted  ;  i.  e.  he  endeavored  to  give  in- 
formation, which  God  had  not  given,  and  to  lead  that  body  into 
a  measure,  into  which  God  had  not  led  them  ;  or,  in  one  word, 
he  attempted  to  bring  to  pass  an  event  which  God  had  not  brought 
to  pass.  And  what  is  this,  on  the  principle  quoted  above,  but 
saying  to  the  Almighty,  "  thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  I  ?"  W^hen- 
ever  a  person  applies  to  a  physician,  or  uses  any  medicine  to  cure 
him  of  any  disease  ;  whenever  the  husbandman  clears  his  land  of 
trees,  brushes  or  weeds  ;  whenever  he  ploughs  or  hoes  it ;  when- 
ever he  mows  the  grass,  reaps  the  grain,  or  gathers  the  fruits  of 
his  trees  ;  as  in  all  these  cases  something  is  done  or  attempted  to 
be  done  different  from  what  God  has  done,  the  agent  says  to  God, 
on  the  forementioned  principle,  "  thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  I." 
In  short,  this  principle  equally  forbids  all  human  action,  as  it  for- 
bids us  to  pray.  For  whenever  Mr.  Paine,  or  any  other  man, 
writes,  speaks,  walks,  or  acts  in  any  form,  he  brings  to  pass,  or 
attempts  to  bring  to  pass,  something  which  God  had  not  already 
brought  to  pass.  Therefore,  as  Mr.  Paine  would  avoid  the  impi- 
ety of  saying  to  God,  "  thou  knowest  not  so  well  as  I ;"  he  must, 
in  future,  be  as  torpid  as  a  serpent  in  winter ;  and  at  the  same 
time,  ought  severely  to  repent  of  his  past  impiety,  in  that  he  has 
ever  done  a  single  action. 

2.   "  The  Creator  has  made  nothing  in  vain." 

This  is  very  frequently  asserted  by  Mr.  Paine. 

But  has  not  the  Creator  made  death,  sickness,  pain,  sorrow, 
disappointment,  mortification,  bereavement,  affliction,  storms, 
shipwrecks,  earthquakes,  inundations,  drought,  famine,  and  deso- 
lation ?  For  what  end  has  he  made  these  things  ?  For  the  hap- 
piness of  man?  How  does  this  appear  on  Mr.  Paine's  principles? 
Would  not  man  have  been  as  happy  in  the  world  without  as  with 
them  ?    Or  if  he  should  say,  they  were  made  to  subserve  the  hap- 


SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS.  535 

piness  of  man  in  the  future  state  ;  how  does  this  appear?  Some 
reason  must  be  given  for  this.  Here  conjectures  ought  not  to  be 
advanced  by  so  zealous  an  advocate  for  reason  as  Mr.  Paine. 
Nor  will  they  be  received  in  this  age  of  reason.  If  these  things 
were  not  made  for  the  happiness  of  man,  it  seems  they  must  have 
been  made  in  vain,  which  is  contrary  to  my  text ;  or  they  must 
have  been  made  for  the  misery  of  man.  If  this  be  admitted,  what 
will  Mr.  Paine,  on  his  principles,  say,  to  vindicate  that  benignity 
and  goodness  of  God  which  he  everywhere  so  highly  celebrates  ? 

3.  '•  The  true  deist's  religion  consists  in  contemplating  the 
power,  wisdom,  and  benignity  of  the  Deity  in  his  works,  and  in 
endeavoring  to  imitate  him  in  everything  moral,  scientifical,  and 
mechanical." 

Mr.  Paine's  true  deist  doubtless  contemplates  all  the  works  of 
God.  How  then  does  he  contemplate  the  forementioned  works, 
death,  sickness,  etc.  ?  Does  he  contemplate  them  with  compla- 
cency ?  In  order  to  this,  he  must  view  them  as  designed  to  sub- 
serve the  purposes  of  goodness.  But  how  does  he  know,  that 
they  do  subserve  these  purposes  ?  Or  does  he  contemplate  them 
with  abhorrence?  Then,  doubtless,  he  contemplates  the  author 
of  tiiem  with  the  same  abhorrence.  And  is  this  the  religion  of  a 
true  deist  ?  The  true  deist's  religion  is  said  to  consist  partly,  "  in 
endeavoring  to  imitate  the  Deity  in  everything  moral."  Now  the 
infliction  of  death,  calamity,  sickness  and  misery  on  mankind,  is 
a  part  of  the  moral  conduct  of  the  Deity.  Therefore,  the  true 
deist,  to  act  up  to  his  religion,  must  imitate  the  Deity  in  this,  and 
must  kill  every  man  within  his  reach.  And  is  every  true  deist  a 
man  of  science  1  This  is  something  new.  This  is  trumping 
high.  Indeed  I  had  been  wont  to  think,  that  some  deists,  as  well 
as  some  christians,  are  destitute  of  science.  But  to  imitate  the 
Deity  in  everything  scientifical,  requires  very  great  science  in- 
deed. From  the  measure  of  science,  which  Mr.  Paine  has  shown 
himself  to  possess,  I  should  conclude,  that  even  he  is  not  capable 
of  this.  It  is  a  favorite  doctrine  of  his,  that  "  the  immensity  of 
space  '\s  filled  with  systems  of  worlds  ;"  i.  e.  immensity  is  exhaust- 
ed, and  therefore  limited,  and  infinity  is  finite.  Another  doc- 
trine of  Mr.  Paine  is,  that  "  all  our  knowledge  of  science  is  de- 
rived from  the  revolutions  of  the  planets." 

But  arithmetic  is  a  science  ;  geometry  is  a  science  ;  astronomy, 
or  a  distribution  of  the  stars  into  constellations,  is  a  science  ;  and 
all  these  sciences  were  known  to  the  ancients,  though  they  were 
ignorant  of  the  true  revolutions  of  the  planets.  And  Mr.  Paine 
must  be  extremely  deficient  in  science,  as  well  as  history,  to  be- 
lieve, that  addition  or  subtraction  were  not,  or  could  not  be  known 


536  SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS. 

in  the  world,  till  the  revolutions  of  the  planets  were  found  out. 
Another  demonstration  of  Mr.  Paine's  attainments  in  science  he 
has  given  in  this  proposition,  tliat  "•  trigonometry ,  when  applied 
to  the  construction  of  figures  drawn  by  a  rule  and  compass,  is 
called  geometry."  If  Mr.  Paine  had  imitated  the  Deity  in  every- 
thing scientifical,  he  would  surely  have  become  possessed  of 
more  science  than  he  did  possess,  when  he  wrote  his  Age  of 
Reason. 

4.  "  It  is  from  the  sciences,  that  all  the  mechanical  arts,  that 
contribute  so  much  to  our  earthly  felicity  and  comfort,  are  de- 
rived." And  does  Mr.  Paine  believe,  that  mankind  never  knew 
how  to  make  shoes,  till  they  were  acquainted  with  the  sciences  ? 
and  that  the  Indians  derive  from  the  sciences,  their  skill  in  mak- 
ing baskets  and  knot  bowls  ? 

5.  "  A  thing  which  every  body  is  required  to  believe,  requires, 
that  the  proof  and  evidence  of  it  should  be  equal  to  all,  and  uni- 
versal." But  is  not  every  body  required  to  believe,  that  Thomas 
Paine  wrote  the  Age  of  Reason  1  and  is  the  evidence  of  this 
equal  to  all  ?  "A  small  number  of  persons,"  perhaps  not  so 
many  as  "  eight  or  nine,"  may  have  seen  him  write  it.  These 
are  introduced  as  proxies  for  the  whole  world,  to  say,  they  saw 
it,  and  all  the  rest  of  the  world  are  called  upon  to  believe  it.  But 
as  "  Thomas  did  not  believe  the  resurrection,  and,  as  they  say, 
would  not  believe,  without  having  occular  and  manual  demon- 
stration himself;  so  neither  will  /,"  believe  that  Paine  wrote  the 
Age  of  Reason.  Thus,  on  the  principle  here  advanced,  we  are 
not  rationally  obligated  to  believe  anything,  of  which  we  have 
not  the  evidence  of  sense. 

6.  "  It  is  impossible  for  us  now  to  know,  that  the  books,"  (of 
the  Evangelists)  "  were  written  by  the  persons  whose  names  they 
bear."  Is  it  possible  for  us  now  to  know,  that  the  reputed  works 
of  Virgil,  Tully  and  Horace,  were  written  by  those  men  ?  Let 
Mr.  Paine  tell  us  on  what  evidence  he  believes  this,  and  I  will 
produce  as  great  or  greater  evidence,  that  t!ie  gospels  were  writ- 
ten by  the  men  whose  names  they  bear.  Besides,  that  the  gos- 
pels were  really  written  by  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke  and  John,  is 
not  so  important,  as  that  the  accounts  they  contain  be  true.  If 
the  facts  related  in  the  gospels  really  took  place  as  related, 
Christianity  is  true  ;  though  the  gospels  were  first  published  anony- 
mously, and  afterward,  by  mistake,  the  names  of  Matthew,  Mark, 
Luke  and  John,  were  affixed  to  them.  The  gospels  certainly 
were  extant  at,  or  very  near  the  time,  in  which  their  reputed  au- 
thors lived ;  and  if  the  accounts  they  contain  be  fictitious,  why 
was  not  this  proved  by  the  virulent  enemies  of  Christianity,  as,  on 


SHORT  COMMENTS  ON  NEW  TEXTS. 


537 


this  supposition,  might  most  easily  have  been  done?  And,  in 
particular,  why  was  it  not  proved,  that  the  gospels  were  not  writ- 
ten by  the  men  whose  names  they  bear  ?  Here,  if  it  were  proper, 
might  be  introduced  the  numerous  attestations  to  many  of  the 
most  important  facts  of  the  gospel,  collected  from  heathen  au- 
thors, by  Grotius,  Lardner,  etc. 

7.  "  What  is  this  world  of  twenty-five  thousand  miles  extent, 
to  the  mighty  ocean  of  space,  and  the  Almighty  power  of  the 
Creator?"  Answer.  What  is  a  system  of  ever  so  many  worlds, 
to  an  infinite  ocean  of  space,  or  to  the  infinite  power  of  the  Crea- 
tor ?  Any  system  of  worlds,  however  large,  is  still  finite  ;  and 
finite  bears  no  proportion  to  infinite.  Any  finite  system  no  more 
exhausts  infinite  space,  or  infinite  power,  than  a  single  world 
does.  So  that  the  objection  which  Mr.  Paine  makes  to  a  small 
system,  still  attends  his  own  supposed  system,  however  large. 

8.  "  The  word  mystery  cannot  be  applied  to  moral  truth,  any 
more  than  obscurity  can  be  applied  to  light.  The  God  in  whom 
we  believe,  is  a  God  of  moral  truth,  and  not  a  God  of  mystery  or 
obscurity.  Mystery  is  the  antagonist  of  truth.  It  is  the  fog  of 
human  invention,  that  obscures  truth,  and  represents  it  in  distor- 
tion. Truth  never  envelopes  itself  in  mystery  ;  and  the  mystery, 
in  which  it  is  at  any  time  enveloped,  is  the  work  of  its  antago- 
nist, and  never  of  itself." 

Mr.  Paine  here  tells  us,  that  "  the  word  mystery  cannot  be 
applied  to  moral  truth.'''  What  mystery  there  may  be  in  Mr. 
Paine's  sense  of  moral  truth,  I  cannot  say.  But  that  there  is  a 
God,  existing  from  eternity  to  eternity,  and  the  first  cause  of  all 
things,  is  a  moral  truth,  in  the  same  sense,  that  the  trinity,  the 
incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God,  the  hypostatical  union,  etc.  sup- 
posing them  to  be  truths,  are  moral  truths.  And  Mr.  Paine  will 
not  deny,  that  there  is  mystery  in  the  divine  existence,  and  es- 
pecially in  his  acting  as  a  first  cause  ;  for  he  says  expressly,  "  it 
is  incomprehensibly  difficult  for  man  to  conceive  what  a  first  cause 
is."  Therefore  Mr.  Paine  was  strangely  forgetful,  or  he  never 
would  have  asserted,  that  the  word  mystery  cannot  be  applied  to 
moral  truth,  and  especially  without  great  forgetfulness  he  would 
not  have  asserted,  that  "  God  is  not  a  God  of  mystery,"  "  Mys- 
tery is  the  fog  of  human  invention."  And  is  the  incomprehen- 
sible mystery  of  a  first  cause,  "  the  fog  of  human  invention  ?" 
And  does  not  the  truth,  that  there  is  a  first  cause,  "  envelope  it- 
self in  mystery  ?"  If  not,  who  envelopes  it  in  mystery  ?  For, 
by  Mr.  Paine's  concession,  it  is  enveloped  in  mystery.  In  my 
text  Mr.  Paine  says,  as  quoted  above,  "  mystery  is  the  antagonist 
of  truth  ;"  and,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  text,  he  says,  "  the  mys- 

VoL.  II.  46 


538  THE  FOUNDATION  OF 

tery  in  which  truth  is  at  any  time  enveloped,  is  the  work  of  its 
antagonist."  Indeed  !  Is  then  mystery  the  work  of  itself  ? 
This  is  strange,  wonderfully  strange,  not  only  as  it  implies,  that 
a  thing  is  the  cause  of  itself;  but  as  it  furnishes  another  instance 
of  Mr.  Paine's  forgetfuhiess,  who,  in  the  same  book,  abundantly 
holds,  that  a  thing  cannot  be  the  cause  of  itself. 

9.  "  Mystery — is  incompatible  with  tiue  religion."  Yet  Mr. 
Paine  asserts,  "  that  everything  we  behold,  is  a  mystery  to  us. 
Our  own  existence  is  a  mystery ;  the  whole  vegetable  world  is  a 
mystery.  We  cannot  account  how  it  is,  that  an  acorn,  when  put 
in  the  ground,  is  made  to  develope  itself,  and  become  an  oak," 
etc.  At  the  same  time,  he  holds,  that  the  creation  is  the  word 
of  God,  and  that  from  it  alone  true  religion  is  to  be  learnt.  How 
can  this  be,  if  the  creation  be  so  full  of  mystery,  and  mystery  be 
inconsistent  with  true  religion  ?  "  The  very  notion  and  design 
of  religion  prove,  even  to  a  demonstration,  that  it  must  be  free 
from  everything  of  mystery,  and  unincumbered  with  everything 
that  is  mysterious."  How  then  can  it  be  learnt  from  the  crea- 
tion, which  is  acknowledged  to  be  full  of  mysteries  !  at  least  as 
full  as  the  written  word  of  God.  And  if  religion  must  be  unin- 
cumbered with  the  mysteries  of  the  written  word,  why  must  it 
not  also  be  unincumbered  with  those  of  creation  ? 

10.  "  A  miracle,  under  any  idea  of  the  word,  is  a  show  ;  and 
whenever  recourse  is  had  to  it,  it  is  degrading  the  Almighty  to 
a  shoiv-man."  This  same  Mr.  Paine  says,  "  that  evei^y  thing  is 
a  miracle,  and  no  one  thing  is  a  greater  miracle  than  another." 
Therefore,  whenever  the  Almighty  produces  anything,  he  pro- 
duces a  miracle,  and  a  miracle  under  any  idea  of  the  word,  is  a 
show.  Therefore,  whenever  the  Almighty  produces  anything, 
he  degrades  himself  into  the  character  of  a  show-man.  It  is  in 
vain  for  Paine  to  endeavor  to  extricate  himself  from  this  difficul- 
ty, by  pretending,  that,  when  he  says,  "  everything  is  a  miracle," 
he  uses  the  word  in  a  peculiar  sense  ;  because  he  says,  under 
every  idea  of  the  word  miracle,  it  is  a  show. 


WHAT  IS  THE  FOUNDATION  OF  MORAL  OBLIGATION  r 

This  question  has  agitated  the  moral  philosophers  for  ages  past  ; 
and  is  still  not  generally  decided.  The  question  is.  On  what  ac- 
count am  I  primarily  bound  to  practise  virtue  ?  But  any  ques- 
tion is  more  intelligible  and  more  easily  solved,  when  reduced  to 
a  particular  case,  than  when  proposed  in  general  terms.     There- 


MORAL  OBLIGATION.  539 

fore,  as  it  is  an  acknowledged  duty  that  we  love  our  fellow  men, 
I  will  state  the  question  witli  relation  to  that  duty  ;  thus,  What 
is  the  primary  reason  tliat  it  is  my  duty  to  love  my  fellow  men  ? 
Concerning  this,  there  has  been  a  variety  of  sentiments  among 
divines  and  philosophers.  Some  have  holdcn,  that  the  primary 
reason  of  my  obligation  to  love  my  neighbor,  is,  that  by  liim  my 
own  happiness  may  be  promoted  ;  and  that  all  love  is  reducible 
to  self-love.  But  this  seems  to  be  liable  to  insuperable  difficulties 
and  objections.  It  destroys  the  very  idea  of  benevolence,  gene- 
rosity and  public  spirit.  For  on  that  ground  no  man  has,  or  ought 
to  have  more  benevolence  to  another,  than  a  creditor  has  to  his 
debtor,  who  wishes  his  debtor  to  prosper,  that  he  may  recover  his 
dues.  But  this  temper  is  not  considered  by  our  Lord  as  a  true 
virtue  in  "  sinners,  who  lend  to  sinners,  that  they  may  receive  as 
much  again."  And  what  an  insult  to  any  charitable  man  would 
it  be,  to  tell  him,  that  in  all  his  benefactions,  he  had  no  direct 
benevolence  to  his  fellow  men,  but  wholly  aimed  at  his  own  in- 
terest 1 

But  some  who  hold,  that  all  love  is  reducible  to  self-love,  and 
that  whatever  we  do,  we  aim  at  our  own  happiness,  explain  them- 
selves to  mean,  that  in  loving  my  neighbor,  I  aim  at  my  own  hap- 
piness in  the  exercise  of  that  love.  If  this  mean,  that  in  loving 
my  neighbor,  I  am  happy,  this,  with  proper  restrictions  is  true. 
In  the  love  of  comj)lacency  I  am  happy,  and  benevolence  is  a 
pleasant  feeling  iii  itself.  Yet,  as  it  may  be  crossed  and  disap- 
pointed, it  may  be  the  occasion  of  pain  and  misery.  But  when  a 
man  is  pleased  with  the  character  of  another,  he  does  not  exercise 
this  complacency  for  the  mere  reason,  that  he  expected  to  be  hap- 
py in  the  exercise  of  it ;  but  has  a  direct  pleasure  in  that  charac- 
ter. The  supposition,  that  a  man  loves  another,  merely  from  the 
motive,  that  he  expects  to  be  happy  in  the  exercise  of  that  love, 
implies  an  equal  ability,  and  equal  motives  to  love  any  person  and 
any  thing.  For  he  who  loves  a  bad  character  is  as  really  happy 
in  the  exercise  of  his  love,  as  he  who  loves  a  good  character. 
Therefore,  why  has  he  not  the  same  motive  which  is  the  prospect 
of  his  own  happiness  in  loving,  to  love  the  bad  character  as  tlie 
good  ?  If,  on  the  other  hand,  it  be  said,  that  the  man  has  some 
other  motive  to  love  the  good  character,  than  he  has  to  love  the 
bad  one,  it  follows,  that  he  does  not  love  the  good  one  from  the 
mere  motive  of  self-love,  or  of  the  prospect  of  being  happy  in  the 
exercise  of  love,  which  is  contrary  to  the  supposition. 

Some  place  the  foundation  of  moral  obligation  in  the  fitness  of 
things ;  i.  e.  it  is  fit  that  I  should  love  my  fellow  men,  therefore 
I  am  obliged  to  love  them.     But  the  question  returns,  why  is  it 


540  THE  FOUNDATION  OF,  ETC. 

fit  ?  So  that  this  solution  does  not  reach  the  bottom  of  the  mat- 
ter. Besides,  leaving  out  IJie  idea  of  a  superior  being  who  has  a 
right  to  control,  and  authoritatively  enjoin  certain  actions,  what 
is  the  difference  between  moral  fitness  and  moral  obligation  ?  In 
this  case,  fitness,  propriety,  duty  and  obligation  seem  to  imply 
one  another,  and  to  be  the  same  thing.  Therefore,  to  say  that 
I  am  obliged,  because  it  is  fit,  is  to  say,  that  I  am  obligated,  be- 
cause T  am  obligated  ;  or  it  is  fit,  because  it  is  fit ;  which  is  to 
give  no  reason  at  all  for  the  obligation. 

Some  hold  that  the  foundation  of  moral  obligation  is  moral 
sense  ;  i.  e.  the  reason  and  foundation  of  my  obligation  to  love 
my  fellow  men  is,  that  I  have  an  inward  sense  or  dictate  of  con- 
science, pointing  out  the  fitness  or  duty  of  that  affection  ;  which 
comes  to  this,  that  it  is  my  duty  to  love  my  fellow  men,  because 
I  see  it  to  be  my  duty.  And  this  is  the  same  absurdity  as  to  say, 
that  the  reason  and  foundation  of  the  existence  of  a  house,  is,  that 
I  see  it  to  exist.  There  is  a  direct  contradiction  in  this  hypothe- 
sis. My  obligation  is  supposed  to  exist  in  order  to  be  seen  by 
my  moral  sense,  and  therefore  previously  to  my  sight  of  it ;  and 
yet  is  supposed  to  arise  from  my  sight,  and  to  be  the  consequence 
of  it.  Besides,  this  hypothesis  makes  duty  and  morality  to  be 
very  variable,  to  change  according  to  the  age,  the  country  and 
the  manners  of  men,  and  to  depend  wholly  on  their  ideas  of  right 
and  wrong,  instead  of  being  founded  on  the  stable  nature  of  things 
or  actions ;  and  on  this  hypothesis,  torturing  captives  is  a  virtue 
among  the  aborigines  of  America ;  and  burning  a  living  wife  on 
the  funeral  pile  of  her  deceased  husband,  is  a  duty  among  the 
natives  of  the  East  Indies. 

Some  teach  that  truth  is  the  foundation  of  moral  obligation, 
and  that  I  am  bound  to  love  my  fellow  men,  because  otherwise  I 
shall  violate  truth,  this  truth,  that  men  are  to  be  loved,  or  it  is 
my  duty  to  love  them.  What  is  this  but  to  say,  that  the  reason 
why  I  am  obligated  to  love  my  fellow  men,  or  why  it  is  my  duty 
to  love  them,  is,  that  it  is  my  duty  to  love  them  ?  which  is  mere 
trifling. 

Others  say,  the  will  of  God  is  the  primary  foundation  of  moral 
obligation.  But  the  will  of  God  is  either  benevolent  or  not.  If 
it  be  benevolent,  and  on  that  account  the  foundation  of  moral 
obligation,  it  is  not  the  source  of  obligation  merely  because  it  is 
the  will  of  God ;  but  because  it  is  benevolent,  and  is  of  a  ten- 
dency to  promote  happiness  ;  and  this  places  the  foundation  of 
obligation  in  a  tendency  to  happiness,  and  not  primarily  in  the 
will  of  God.  But  if  the  will  of  God ,  and,  that  which  is  the  expres- 
sion of  it,  the  divine  law,  be  allowed  to  be  not  benevolent,  and  yet 


WARRANT  OF  THE   SINNER  TO  BELIEVE   IN  CHRIST.  541 

are  the  foundation  of  obligation,  we  are  obliged  to  conform  to 
them,  whatever  they  be,  however  malevolent  or  opposite  to  holi- 
ness and  goodness  the  requirements  be.  But  this,  I  presume, 
none  will  pretend.  If  the  will,  or  law  of  God  be  the  primary 
foundation  or  reason  of  our  obligation  to  virtue,  it  is  the  primary 
rule  and  standard  of  virtue,  and  therefore  right  in  itself,  whatever 
it  be,  however  malicious,  envious  or  tyrannical ;  which  is  absurd. 
On  the  supposition,  that  the  will,  or  law  of  God  is  the  primary 
foundation,  reason  and  standard  of  right  and  virtue,  every  attempt 
to  prove  the  moral  perfections  or  attributes  of  God  is  absurd  ;  for 
in  every  such  attempt,  the  idea  which  the  author  of  that  attempt 
has  of  right,  is  set  up  as  the  rule  or  standard  of  right ;  and  the 
divine  attributes  are  compared  with  it,  and  proved,  or  attempted  to 
be  proved,  to  be  conformed  to  it.  But  if  the  divine  will,  or,  which 
is  the  same,  the  divine  moral  attributes,  be  the  primary  standard 
of  right,  all  we  have  to  do  is,  to  inquire  what  that  will  is;  and 
whatever  it  is,  whether  benevolent  or  malevolent,  it  is  the  stan- 
dard of  right,  the  })attern  of  virtue,  and  the  source  of  obligation. 

To  suppose  that  the  will  and  law  of  God,  whatever  they  be, 
are  the  foundation  and  standard  of  obligation,  of  right,  and  of 
virtue,  is  to  suppose  that  all  moral  obligation  is  founded  on  mere 
power  and  supremacy  ;  which  few  will  avow. 

I  will  now  jjropose  what  I  believe  to  be  the  true  foundation  of 
moral  obligation,  or  of  the  obligation  to  virtue.  It  is  the  tenden- 
cy of  virtue  to  happiness — happiness  on  the  large  scale,  or  hap- 
piness to  the  intellectual  system,  and  the  happiness  of  every  in- 
dividual being,  whose  happiness  is  not  inconsistent  with  that  of 
the  system.  Thus  I  am  obligated  to  my  fellow  men,  because  that 
love  tends  to  their  happiness,  and  to  the  happiness  of  the  intel- 
lectual system.  But  if  love  and  attachment  to  an  individual,  in 
any  case,  as  to  a  murderer,  whose  life  and  prosperity  are  incon- 
sistent with  general  happiness,  tend  to  impair  the  general  happi- 
ness, I  am  not  obligated,  in  that  case,  to  love  him.  And  if,  in 
any  instance,  my  own  happiness  or  gratification  be  inconsistent 
with  that  of  the  system,  I  am  to  give  it  up  as  a  sacrifice  to  the 
system. 


CONCERNING  THE  WARRANT  OF  THE  SINNER  TO 
BELIEVE  IN  CHRIST. 

I  have  lately  read  a  piece,  entitled,  "Glad  Tidings  to  perishing 
sinners  :  or  the  genuine  gospel  a  complete  warrant  to  the  ungod- 
ly to  believe  in  Jesus.     By  Abraham  Booth,"  of  London.     Mr. 

46* 


542  WARRANT  OF  THE  SINNER 

Booth's  object  is,  to  prove  that  unregenerate  shiners  have  a  war- 
rant from  the  gospel  to  beheve  in  Christ,  and  to  this  end  has 
written  a  book  of  234  pages.  The  merit  and  usefulness  of  Mr. 
Locke's  Essay  on  the  understanding  is  generally  acknowledged. 
But  I  presume,  that  it  contains  not  a  truer  and  more  useful  prop- 
osition, than  that  most  disputes  arise  from  the  ambiguity  of  words, 
and  the  use  of  the  same  words,  in  a  different  sense.  This  is  em- 
inently true  with  regard  to  the  disputes  in  which  Mr.  Booth  has 
engaged.  He  maintains,  that  the  unregenerate  have  a  warrant 
by  the  calls,  invitations  and  commands  of  the  gospel,  to  believe 
in  Christ.  If,  by  believing  in  Christ  he  mean,  believing  all  the 
facts  related  in  the  gospel,  and  all  the  truths  there  taught  con- 
cerning Christ,  I  presume  his  opponents  will  agree  with  him  in 
asserting,  that  the  unregenerate  have  a  warrant  to  believe.  Nor 
will  they  oppose  him,  if  beside  an  assent  of  the  understanding  to 
the  facts  and  truths  before  mentioned,  he  mean  by  believing,  a 
cordial  receiving  of  them,  an  assent  to  them  with  complacency, 
or,  as  the  scripture  expresses  it,  "  receiving  the  love  of  the  truth." 
Every  man  has,  on  the  ground  of  the  divine  testimony,  a  right  or 
warrant,  and  is  indispensably  obligated,  to  believe,  all  the  facts 
and  doctrines  exhibited  in  the  gospel.  He  is  also  warranted  and 
indispensably  obligated,  to  rejoice  in  those  facts,  and  to  love  those 
doctrines,  for  the  same  reason  as  he  is  warranted  to  love  the 
Lord  with  all  his  heart,  and  his  neighbor  as  himself;  to  delight 
in  the  divine  law,  or  to  repent  and  turn  from  his  evil  ways. 

But  if  by  believing  in  Christ,  Mr.  Booth,  with  many  others, 
mean,  a  persuasion  or  confidence  of  any  person,  that  Christ  is  his 
Savior ;  that  his  sins  are  forgiven  for  Christ's  sake  ;  and  that  he 
shall,  through  Christ  be  saved  ;  Mr.  Booth  must  not  expect,  that 
it  will  be  granted,  that  any  unregenerate  sinner  has  a  warrant  to 
believe  this.  Will  Mr.  Booth  pretend,  that  the  sins  of  any  man 
are  forgiven,  while  he  remains  unregenerate  ?  Or  that  while  he 
remains  unregenerate,  he  can  have  any  evidence  "  from  scripture, 
sense  or  reason,"  that  he  shall  be  saved  ?  Or  that  a  man  ought 
to  believe  this  without  evidence  ?  However  undesigned  it  may 
have  been,  Mr.  Booth's  account  of  his  meaning,  is  not  explicit. 
He  says,  p.  3,  "  By  believing  in  Jesus  Christ,  I  mean  relying  up- 
on him,  as  revealed  in  the  doctrine  of  grace,  for  pardon,  peace 
and  every  spiritual  blessing."  Now,  he  who  believes  that  his 
sins  are  or  will  be  pardoned,  and  that  he  shall  be  saved  through 
Christ,  does  "  rely  on  him  for  pardon,  peace  and  every  spiritual 
blessing,"  as  well  as  he  who  believes  the  sufficiency  of  Christ  to 
procure  for  him  those  blessings,  wishes  to  obtain  them  through 
him  only,  and  fully  and  joyfully  believes,  that  if  ever  he  shall  ob- 


TO  BELIEVE  IN  CHRIST.  543 

tain  them,  it  will  be  through  him.  I  grant,  that  in  this  last  sense, 
the  gospel  warrants  the  unregenerate  to  rely  on  Christ  for  par- 
don, peace  and  every  spiritual  blessing,  but  not  in  the  former 
sense. 

This  ambiguity  of  the  expressions,  believing  in  Christ,  rely- 
ing on  Christ,  etc.  is  all  the  foundation  of  this  dispute  ;  as  it  is 
presumed,  that  Mr.  Booth  will  not  pretend,  that  the  unregenerate 
have  a  warrant  to  believe  that  theij  shall  be  saved.  And,  on  the 
other  hand,  none  of  his  opponents  will  deny,  that  all  the  unre- 
generate have  a  warrant  to  believe,  and  love  the  truth  as  it  is  in 
Jesus. 

Another  point,  much  insisted  on  by  Mr.  Booth,  is,  that  holi- 
ness is  not  requisite  to  faith  in  Christ.  This  also  needs  expla- 
nation. If  it  mean,  that  personal  holiness  is  not  previously  ne- 
cessary to  give  a  man  a  right  or  warrant  to  believe  and  love  the 
truths  of  the  gospel,  I  grant,  that  it  is  no  more  previously  neces- 
sary to  this,  than  it  is  to  the  love  of  God,  repentance  for  the  re- 
mission of  sins,  etc.  But  if  it  mean,  that  true  and  saving  faith 
is  not  an  holy  act  or  exercise,  this  is  not  granted.  It  is  a  saving 
grace,  and,  therefore,  as  all  grace  does,  it  implies  or  involves  ho- 
liness, or  is  a  holy  act.  True  faith  in  Christ,  is  a  cordial  re- 
ceiving of  Christ  as  the  Savior ;  and  this  implies  complacency  in 
him.  But  complacency  in  Christ,  is  doubtless,  a  holy  act,  for 
the  same  reason  that  love  to  God  the  Father  is.  It  is  called  "  the 
most  holy  faith."  This  is  saying  even  more  than  barely  that  it 
is  a  holy  act.  It  "  worketh  by  love."  If  love  to  God  and  divine 
truth  be  an  act  of  holiness,  doubtless  that  faith,  which  worketh, 
energizeth  or  exerciseth  itself  by  love,  is  also  holy.  "  Faith  with- 
out works  is  dead."  Therefore,  a  living  or  saving  faith  is  attend- 
ed with  good  works  and  produces  them.  And  as  are  the  streams, 
so  is  the  fountain.  As  the  effects  of  this  grace  are  holy,  so  is 
the  grace  itself.  Mr.  Booth  defines  faith  to  be  "  a  relying  upon 
Christ  for  pardon,  peace  and  every  spiritual  blessing."  Now 
this  act  is  either  of  a  moral  nature  or  not.  If  it  be  not  of  a  moral 
nature,  unbelief  is  not  of  a  moral  nature,  and,  therefore,  there  is 
no  sin  in  it,  and,  consequently,  there  is  no  foundation  for  the 
spirit  to  convince  the  world  of  sin,  because  they  believe  not  on 
Christ.  If  relying  on  Christ  for  pardon,  etc.  be  a  moral  act,  it 
is  either  a  virtuous  or  vicious  act,  a  holy  or  a  sinful  act.  And 
will  he  say,  that  an  act  of  sin  and  alienation  from  God,  "  w^ork- 
eth  by  love,"  produces  good  works,  and  "  purifies  the  heart." 
(Acts  15:  9.)  If  not,  it  seems,  he  must  allow,  that  faith  is  a 
holy  act. 


544  OF  SELF-LOVE. 


OF  SELF-LOVE. 


In  all  discourses  concerning  the  nature  of  virtue  or  vice,  bene- 
volence, public  spirit,  etc.  self-love  is  often  mentioned,  and  often 
made  the  subject  of  disquisition  ;  yet  it  appears  to  me,  that  no 
subject  is  less  understood.  Most  who  speak  or  write  on  this  sub- 
ject, seem  to  consider  self-love  as  a  particular  or  single  affection, 
as  the  love  of  honor,  or  the  natural  affection  of  parents  to  their 
children.  This,  I  conceive,  is  a  mistake.  Self-love  is  loosely 
said  to  be  the  love  of  our  own  happiness.  But  what  if  a  man's 
happiness  consist  in  benevolence  and  beneficence,  and  in  com- 
parison with  this,  he  is  willing  to  give  up  all  his  other  happiness, 
is  this  mere  self-love  ?     Is  it  not  benevolence  itself  ? 

A  man's  own  happiness  then,  which  is  the  object  of  self-love, 
consists  in  something  else  than  the  good  of  others,  or  than  be- 
nevolence and  beneficence,  i.  e.  it  consists  in  the  indulgence  of 
those  appetites  and  affections  which  are  merely  private  and  per- 
sonal, centering  in  him,  who  is  the  subject  of  them,  and  not  aim- 
ing at  the  good  of  others ;  such  as  the  several  bodily  appetites,  a 
love  of  honor  and  ease.  Therefore  self-love  is  the  love  of  that  hap- 
piness which  is  enjoyed  in  eating  and  drinking,  in  honor,  personal 
ease,  and  in  intercourse  with  the  opposite  sex. 

Loving  self  as  self  is  a  definition  of  self-love,  which,  it  seems, 
has  become  famous.  If  to  love  ourselves  is  to  love  food,  drink,  hon- 
or, etc.  what  is  it  to  love  these  as  self?  Surely  not  to  love  them 
as  food,  drink,  etc.  The  truth  is,  those  objects  are,  in  their  own 
nature,  agreeable  to  every  man,  who  has  the  common  appetites 
of  human  nature. 

Self-love  has  been  said  to  be  in  its  own  nature  sinful ;  but  are 
an  appetite  for  food,  a  desire  of  honor  and  ease,  in  their  own 
nature,  sinful  ?  It  will  not  be  pretended  ;  no  more  is  self-love, 
if  it  consist  in  those  appetites,  and  the  exercises  of  them.  Nay, 
as  those  appetites  are  in  themselves  neither  virtuous  nor  vicious ; 
so  neither  is  self-love,  if  it  consist  in  them.  I  am  sensible,  that 
such  an  idea  of  self-love  may  be  formed,  and  is  entertained  by 
many,  as  implies  that  it  is  invariably  sinful.  The  idea  is,  that 
self-love  is  a  preference  of  ourselves,  and  of  our  own  happiness, 
to  any  other  object.  This  is  in  every  instance  sinful.  But  I  con- 
ceive that  it  is  not  a  true  account  of  self-love.  It  is  commonly 
granted,  that  even  a  good  man  may,  and  does  lawfully  love  him- 
self, or  exercise  self-love.  But  he  cannot  lawfully  love  himself  in 
preference  to  every  other  object.  The  appetites  before  mentioned, 
are  indeed  indulged  sinfully,  whenever  the  objects  of  them  are 


OF  SELF-LOVE.  545 

pursued  or  retained  with  an  inordinate  attachment,  i.  e.  in  pre- 
ference to  more  important  good.  But  when  a  more  important 
good  does  not  require  a  man  to  give  up  his  meal,  or  submit  to 
shame,  he  may  lawfully  indulge  his  native  appetite  for  food  and 
for  honor. 

It  has  been  said,  that  if  the  lowest  degree  of  self-love  be  not 
sinful,  neither  is  the  highest;  that  if  you  increase  a  good  or  an 
innocent  thing  ever  so  much,  you  do  not  change  the  nature  of  it 
and  make  it  evil.  But  I  do  not  acknowledge  this  reasoning  to 
be  conclusive.  ,A  moderate  fire  in  a  house  may  be  a  good  and 
useful  thing,  but  a  very  large  one  may  be  very  evil  and  destruc- 
tive. A  moderate  appetite  for  wine  or  spirituous  liquors  may  be 
innocent,  but  a  strong  thirst  for  them  may  be  ruinous.  So,  a 
moderate  attachment  to  food,  honor  and  ease,  may  be  innocent. 
But  to  be  so  attached  to  them,  as  not  to  be  willing  to  give  them 
up,  when  the  preservation  of  our  own,  or  the  life  of  another  re- 
quires it,  is  wrong  and  vicious. 

It  has  been  said,  that  we  ought  to  love  ourselves  as  a  part  of 
the  system  only  ;  and  in  mere  subserviency  to  the  general  good. 
If  this  mean,  tliat  a  man  ought  not  to  have  an  immediate  and  di- 
rect relish  for  his  own  happiness  or  pleasure  in  food,  honor,  etc. 
but  ought  to  regard  them  as  he  does  a  dose  of  ipecacuanha,  mere- 
ly because  it  is  useful  to  some  other  purpose  than  the  immediate 
communication  of  pleasure  ;  this  is  manifestly  false. 

Here  an  objection  will  arise  ;  what  then  does  the  scripture 
mean  when  it  requires  us,  "  whether  we  eat  or  drink,  or  whatever 
we  do,  to  do  all  to  the  glory  of  God  ?"  It  surely  does  not  mean, 
that  we  are  to  eat  or  drink  without  any  pleasant  relish  of  what 
we  eat  or  drink,  but  that  we  are  not  to  be  so  attached  to  the  plea- 
sure of  eating  or  drinking,  as  not  to  be  ready  at  any  time  to  give 
it  up,  if  the  glory  of  God  require  it. 

It  seems  to  follow  from  what  is  said  above,  that  the  sinfulness 
of  self-love  depends  not  on  the  nature  of  it,  but  entirely  on  the 
degree.  There  is  no  sin  in  merely  loving  food,  honor  and  ease, 
but  when  we  are  so  engrossed  in  love  to  them,  as  to  forget  and 
neglect  more  important  good,  as  the  glory  of  God,  the  good  of 
his  kingdom,  or  any  more  important  interest  of  ourselves  or  others, 
then  we  commit  sin. 

What  has  been  said  may  afford  an  answer  to  this  question : 
Does  any  unregenerate  person  love  himself  more  than  one  who  is 
regenerate  ?  I  answer,  yes  ;  much  more ;  as  he  is  much  more 
attached  to  his  private  interest  or  happiness,  in  so  much  that  this 
is  his  chief  good,  and  he  is  not  willing  to  give  it  up  for  any  more 
important  good   whatever.     But  a  regenerate  person,  though  he 


546  OF   SELF-LOVE. 

may  have  as  high  a  relish  for  food,  drink,  honor  and  ease,  as  the 
unregenerate,  yet  he  has  an  interest,  inconceivably  more  import- 
ant in  itself,  and  in  his  esteem,  than  any,  or  all  these  ;  and,  there- 
fore, he  is  not  so  attached  to  these  but  that  he  can  freely  give 
them  up  when  that  more  important  interest  calls  for  it.  Thus  he 
can  "deny  himself,  and  take  up  his  cross  and  follow  Christ." 

Perhaps  it  will  be  objected  to  a  part  of  what  has  been  said, 
that  if  self-love  be,  in  itself,  neither  virtuous  nor  vicious,  a  great 
part  of  the  exercises  of  the  unregenerate  are  innocent.  To  this  I 
answer,  they  are  no  more  innocent  than  their  exercises  about 
food,  honor,  and  their  own  ease  ;  and  none  of  these  voluntary 
exercises  are  innocent,  unless  they  are  willing  to  give  up  the  ob- 
jects of  them,  whenever  the  divine  glory  or  the  general  good  re- 
quires it.     But  this  is  not  true  of  the  unregenerate. 


It  is  said,  that  if  self-love  be  sin  in  any  case,  it  is  always  and 
in  all  cases  sin  ;  that  to  say  that  self-love  not  regulated  is  sin, 
and  well  regulated  is  not  sin,  is  as  absurd  as  to  say,  that  sin  not 
regulated  is  sin,  but  well  regulated  is  not  sin.  This  is  insisted 
on  by  a  writer  in  the  Theological  Magazine,  vol.  iii.  page  283, 
etc.  He  says,  page  284,  "  according  to  this,"  (the  supposition 
that  self-love  properly  regulated  is  not  sin)  "•  self-love,  when  by 
itself,  and  acting  out  its  own  nature,  is  sinful  and  sin  itself;  but 
when  regulated  and  restrained  by  some  good  principle,  while  the 
nature  of  it  is  not  changed,  it  becomes  holy — which  is  the  same 
with  sin's  becoming  holiness  by  regulation  and  restraint,  without 
any  change  in  its  nature."  Yet  this  same  writer  abundantly 
holds,  that  every  man  may,  consistently  with  holiness,  regard  him- 
self "according  to  his  capacity  and  importance  in  the  general 
system."  Now,  what  is  this  but  a  well  regulated  self-love  ?  Ac- 
cording to  this  writer's  own  principles,  therefore,  if  a  man  regard 
himself  more  than  "  according  to  his  capacity  and  importance," 
it  is  sin.  But  if  he  regard  himself  just  according  to  his  capacity 
and  importance,  it  is  holiness  ;  and  "  sin  becomes  holiness  by 
regulation  and  restraint."  If  he  regard  himself  more  than  "  ac- 
cording to  his  capacity  and  importance,"  it  is  benevolence,  gene- 
ral benevolence.  Therefore,  selfishness,  by  "  regulation  and  re- 
straint," becomes  general  benevolence. 

But  perhaps  it  may  be  pleaded,  that  in  the  aforesaid  quotation, 
the  author  has  saved  himself  by  the  clause,  "  while  the  nature  of 
it  is  not  changed."  The  passage  is,  "  self-love,  when  regulated 
and  restrained  by  some  good  principle,  while  the  nature  of  it  is 


OF  SELF-LOVE.  547 

not  changed,  it  becomes  holy."  To  this  the  answer  is,  to  sup- 
pose timi  the  nature  of  self-love,  in  the  case  put,  is  not  changed 
with  regard  to  sin  and  holiness,  is  begging  the  question,  and 
those  whom  our  author  opposes,  no  more  suppose  that  the  nature 
of  it  is  not  changed  by  the  regulation  and  restraint  than  he  does. 
If  he  suppose  that  the  nature  of  self-love  is  not  changed,  by  the 
regulation  which  he  allows  and  advocates,  he  falls  into  the  very 
absurdity  which  he  imputes  to  those  whom  he  opposes.  If  he 
suppose  that  the  nature  of  it  is  changed,  (as  he  certainly  does, 
because  his  idea  is,  that  under  the  regulation  which  he  allows,  it 
becomes  general  benevolence ;)  those  whom  he  opposes  have  the 
same  right  to  hold  the  same  change  to  be  effected,  by  the  regu- 
lation for  which  they  plead.  Indeed,  so  ftir  as  I  understand  the 
dispute,  the  regulation  for  which  they  plead,  is  the  very  same  with 
that  which  he  allows.  Both  parties  agree,  that  no  man  has  a 
right  to  regard  himself  or  his  own  interest,  any  further  than  ac- 
cording to  his  capacity  and  importance  ;  and  that  every  man  is, 
in  duty  bound,  to  regard  himself  according  to  his  capacity  and 
importance,  in  a  consistency  with  the  general  good. 

Our  author  informs  us,  that  "  all  he  means  by  self-love  is  selfish- 
ness or  selfish  love."  I  grant,  every  writer  may  explain  his  own 
meaning ;  but  commonly  we  ought  to  use  words  in  their  usual 
sense.  Now,  the  scripture,  in  that  noted  text,  "  Thou  shalt  love 
thy  neighbor  as  thyself,"  speaks  of  self-love.  It  is  as  if  it  had  said, 
Thy  love  to  thy  neighbor  shall  be  as  thy  love  to  thyself,  or  as  thy 
self-love.  And  our  author  allows,  that  the  self-love  here  intend- 
ed, is  not  selfishness  nor  a  selfish  love.  Surely,  if  the  scripture 
use  self-love  to  mean  something  different  from  selfishness,  we  have 
a  right  to  do  the  same.  Our  author  speaks  of  "  a  proper  regard 
for  our  own  greatest  happiness  ;"  "  of  benevolence  to  one's  self, 
according  to  his  capacity  and  importance  ;"  and  of  "  love  having 
a  regard  to  the  person  who  exercises  it."  Now,  what  are  these 
but  phrases  synonymous  with  loving  ourselves,  or  self-love  ? 
"  Regard  to  our  greatest  happiness  is  loving  ourselves  ;  so  is  be- 
nevolence to  one's  self,"  and  "  love  having  a  regard  to  the  per- 
son who  exercises  it."  However,  it  is  not  wortii  while  to  dispute 
about  words. 

Our  author  thinks  it  impossible,  to  describe  a  self-love  of  a  "dif- 
fererent  kind  from  selfishness,  which  is  not  included  in  universal 
disinterested  benevolence."  President  Edwards  did  not  think  this 
impossible,  as  he  has  actually  given  a  description  of  such  self-love. 
'•  Self-love,"  says  he,  "  most  commonly  signifies  a  man's  regard  to 
his  confined  private  self;  or  love  to  himself  with  respect  to  his 
private  interest.     By  private  interest  I  mean  that  which  most  im- 


548  •  OF  SELF-LOVE. 

mediately  consists  in  those  pleasures  or  pains  that  are  personal." 
These  personal  pleasures  and  pains  he  proceeds  to  inform  us,  to 
be  those  of  the  sensitive  appetites,  a  sense  of  honor  and  contempt, 
external  beauty,  and  all  secondary  beauty,  whether  in  things  ex- 
ternal or  internal,  etc.  It  will  not  be  pretended,  that  a  regard  to 
those  pleasures  and  pains,  so  far  only  as  is  consistent  with  the 
general  good,  is  selfishness,  or  is  general  benevolence  ;  general 
benevolence  may  influence  a  man  to  choose  and  wish  for  roast 
beef  and  a  glass  of  wine,  as  he  wishes  for  some  bitter  and  nau- 
seous pill,  when  necessary  for  his  usefulness  to  the  general  good  ; 
but  it  will  never  influence  him  to  choose  and  take  them  with  the 
pleasure  and  relish,  with  which  they  generally  are  taken.  The 
love  which  Adam  in  Paradise  had  for  the  fruits  of  the  garden, 
though  perfectly  consistent  with  entire  benevolence,  was  not  be- 
nevolence itself.  The  same  may  be  said  of  all  those  personal 
feelings,  in  which  President  Edwards  places  self-love.  Here  then 
is  a  description  of  self-love,  different  both  from  selfishness,  and 
from  universal  disinterested  benevolence. 

Surely  our  author  will  not  deny,  that  all  our  natural  appetites 
must  be  regulated  and  restrained,  and  must  be  indulged  so  far 
only  as  is  consistent  with  the  general  good  ;  and  that  when  the 
love  of  wine  is  thus  indulged,  it  is  innocent ;  and  that  Timothy, 
in  "  taking  a  little  wine  for  the  stomach's  sake,  and  his  often  in- 
firmities," might  exercise  true  virtue  or  holiness  ;  yet  that  the  love 
of  wine,  unregulated  and  unrestrained,  is  both   vile  and  vicious. 

When  it  is  said,  that  self-love  cannot  be  subordinated  to  the 
general  good  ;  if  by  self-love  be  meant  selfishness,  I  grant  it.  But 
there  is  no  impossibility  of  subordinating  to  the  general  good  such 
self-love  as  President  Edwards  has  described. 

The  scripture  says  much  of  self-denial,  and  of  the  duty  of  it. 
Doubtless  this  is  a  true  and  important  christian  grace.  But  self- 
denial  is  nothing  but  restraining  our  self-love,  and  subjecting  or 
subordinating  it  to  the  general  good. 

The  gentlemen  who  deny,  that  self-love  can  be  so  regulated 
as  to  be  innocent,  or  can  be  subordinated  to  the  public  good,  yet 
talk  of  a  mon's  personal  good,  of  his  own  particular  interest, 
etc.  Now,  doubtless,  a  regard  to  this  persona/  good,  and  a  man's 
0W71  particular  interest,  is  self-love.  And  as  this  interest  may 
be  subordinated  to  the  general  good,  so  may  the  regard  to  it, 
which  is  self-love. 


GENERAL   INDEX. 


Adam,  on  sinning  not  after  tlie  similitude  of  his  transgression,  ii.  526 — 7. 
Agency,  moral,  whether  a  capacity  to  know  our  duty  is  necessary  to,  ii. 

5r>— 17. 

Atonement,  no  need  of,  on  Dr.  Chauncy's  scheme,  64,  Thoughts  on  the, 
493 — 507.  Christ  suffered  as  a  substitute,  493 — 8.  Objections  to  the 
atonement ;  incredible,  501 — useless,  503 — inconsistent  with  grace,  503 
— unjust,  504.  Essence  of  the  gosj)el,  505 — 7.  Necessity  of,  and  its 
consistency  with  free  grace  in  forgiveness,  498 — 503.  ii.  11 — 52.  We 
are  forgiven  only  through  the  atonement  of  Christ,  12 — 14.  Atonement 
is  necessary  in  all  cases,  14 — 16.  To  preserve  the  authority  of  law  and 
vindicate  the  character  of  God,  15.  Must  be  adequate,  17.  Cannot  be 
made  by  our  (a)  repentance  and  reformation,  18 — or  (b)  partial  punish- 
ment, 20.  Christ's  mission  necessary  to  it,  20.  His  obedience  no  part 
of  it,  41. 

B. 

Believers  united  to  Christ,  ii.  258.     By  a  vital  and  a  relative  union,  259 — 62. 
Benevolence  of  God  in  inflicting  punishment,  ii.  466 — 8. 
Brutes,  difference  between  and  men,  433.   ii.  103.     Whether  moral  agents, 
513. 

C. 

Calamities,  private,  public,  spiritual,  ii.  173 — 4.  How  Christians  supported 
under,  174 — 9. 

Certainty  antecedent,  in  the  order  of  nature,  to  foreknowledge,  403.  Not 
subsequent,  412 — as  consistency  i-equires  Dr.  West  to  admit,  415.  If 
it  be  consistent  with  freedom,  the  cause  of  it  is  also,  408. 

Charity,  its  fruits,  4.55.  Meaning  of,  ii.  448.  In  what  sense  the  veil  of  sins, 
452.     Reasons  for  practising,  45.3. 

Chauncy,  Dr.,  his  doctrine  of  universal  salvation  examined,  5 — 262.  His 
principles  inconsistent  with  each  other,  5 — 16.  Objections  answered,  16 
— 24.  His  arguments  to  prove  endless  punishment  inconsistent  with  jus- 
tice, examined,  72 — 91.  His  argument  from  Rom.  5:  12,  etc.  142 — 58 
Rom.  8: 19 — 24, 159 — 79  —  from  various  other  passages,  179 — 211.  His 
scheme  in  its  relation  to  his  ideas  of  liberty  and  moral  agency,  211 — 18. 
His  answers  to  the  arguments  from  the  texts  that  punishment  is  forever, 
etc.  replied  to,  218 — 244.  His  views  on  the  bad  tendency  of  his  doc- 
trines, and  of  the  texts  whicli  relate  to  Judas,  244 — 8. 

Children,  absurd  not  to  teach  them  i)articular  sentiments  in  religion,  ii.  220. 

Christ,  liis  kingdom  without  end,  209.  Did  not  literally  pay  our  debt,  ii. 
Vol.  II.  47 


^^^  GENERAL  INDEX. 

26.  His  sufferiiigs  do  not  prove  the  law  just,  38.  Gain  to  the  universe 
from  h,s  death,  u.  43.  In  what  sense  our  justification,  ii.  269.  Cruci- 
fied, what  It  is  to  preach,  ii.  275-83.  Suffered  as  a  substitute,  276.  In 
what  respects  he  is  a  stumbling-block,  283-8.  His  counsel  to  be  fol- 
lowed, wiiy,  n.  422—7. 

Chnstmmty  heWef  of,  necessary  to  political  prosperity,  ii.  185.      Compared 
with  modern  infidelity,  188,  201-5— with  ancient  paganism,  190-901 
liest  promotes  virtue,  195—200. 

Churches,  their  duties,  ii.  159. 

Clarke,  Dr.,  inconsistent,  307, 325.  On  the  power  of  not  acting,  317.  Criti- 
cised, 339.  His  doctrine  that  we  efficiently  cause  our  volitions  accord- 
ing to  motives,  366  et  seq. 

Covenants,  two,  ii,  361. 

D. 

Damned,  the,  whether  they  suffer  as  much  as  they  deserve,  18—23.  De- 
serve and  will  sutler  other  punishment  than  what  is  conducive  to  their 
good,  24—72.  Their  punishment  not  annihilation,  91— 105— but  justly 
consists  in  misery,  105-16_which,  though  endless,  is  consistent  with 
God's  goodness,  ]  19—42. 

Death,  in  what  sense  the  last  enemy,  201. 

Deislic  objections,  with  answers,  ii.  518-26.  Short  comments  on  new 
texts,  533 — 8. 

Depravity,  the  source  of  infidelity,  ii.  161. 

Destruction,  of  two  kinds,  ii.  413.- causes  of,  418—422. 

Doctrines  of  Christianity,  ought  to  be  studied  by  all,  ii.  214, 

E. 

Edwards,  the  father,  his  improvements  in  theologv,  481—92.  As  to  the 
ultimate  end  of  the  creation,  481.  Liberty  and  necessitv,  481—4.  The 
nature  of  holiness,  484.  The  origin  of  moral  evil,  485.  The  doctrine  of 
the  atonement,  486.  The  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  and  of  Christ's 
righteousness,  486—8.  Tlie  state  of  the  unregenerate,  488.  The  nature 
of  experimental  religion,  489.  Dismterested  aflfection,  490.  Regenera- 
tion, 490.  '^ 

Edwards,  the  son,  his  residence  among  the  Mohegans,  469.  Sermon  at  his 
death,  509.  His  parentage,  510.  His  temper  and  conduct,  511.  As  a 
scholar,  513.  His  sickness  and  death,  514.  His  farewell  discourse  at 
Colebrook,  ii.  225— in  New  Haven,  ii.  340. 

Effed,  whether  the  nature  of  the  cause  may  be  known  by  the,  441. 

Elect,  their  acceptance  and  safety,  ii.  378.     Reason  of  it,  382. 

Election,  objections  to,  ii.  508—12.  Whether  it  implies  partiality,  509.  In- 
consistence, 510.     Lisincerity,  511. 

EUgihility  of  two  objects,  never  equal,  366- 

Evil,  moral,  in  its  own  nature  odious,  38. 


Faith,  justifying,  implies  a  compliance  with  the  gospel  in  heart  and  life, 
ii.  142—4.     Not  a  speculative  assent,  for  this  is  dead  faith,  and  the 


GENERAL    INDEX.  551 

damned  have  it,  145.  Implies  assent  of  understandinfj  and  consent  of 
will,  147.  Wliy  tliis  complex  exercise  termed  faith,  148.  Why  a  word 
of  more  determinate  meanini^  not  used,  14!>.  How  far  it  is  an  appro- 
priating act,  150.  Error  as  to  its  nature,  153.  Whether  first  gracious 
exercise,  154.     A  duty,  15.5. 

Fnlalism,  which  West  charges  on  Pres.  Edwards,  is  equally  chargeable  on 
himself,  4-38. 

Foreknowledge,  3!)8 — 420.  Implies  necessity,  {VX> — i.  e.  certain  futurity, 
418.  West's  denial  of  this,  400 — his  admission,  401 — remarks  on  a 
paragraph  from  him,  403 — 5 — concedes  everything,  40(5.  With  what 
liberty  it  is  consistent,  408.  Difference  between  it  and  knowledge  of  a 
present  act,  401). 

Forgiveness  is  by  grace,  ii.  3.3 — not  merely  as  founded  on  an  act  of  grace, 
24.  Attempts  to  prove  the  consistency  of  with  forgiveness  through  re- 
demption, ii.  23 — 29.     Edwards'  theory,  31. 

Fraiiklin,  Dr.  his  ground  of  hope  for  futm-e  happiness,  ii.  52G. 

Future  state  required,  that  it  may  ap])ear,  that  God  is  holy,  ii.  314 — that 
the  world  is  made  for  a  vahiable  end,  318 — that  the  happiness  of  the 
univeree  may  be  increased,  320. 

G. 

God,  \A  hetlicr  all  that  he  wills  comes  to  pass,  189.  Whether  he  has  self- 
determination,  320,  324.  In  what  sense  all  his  knowledge  is  present 
knowledge,  41(1  How  far  he  is  concerned  in  the  existence  of  sin,  439 
— and  takes  pleasure  in  it,  442 — and  tempts  to  sin,  451 — and  decrees  it, 
453 — overrules  it  to  good,  4.5.5.  A  refuge,  ii.  175.  How  he  is  present  with 
christians,  232.  The  author  of  all  good  volitions  and  actions,  ii.  348 — 
which  are  the  effects  of  his  sovereign  grace,  349 — yet  our  agency  is  not 
destroyed,  350 — nor  our  freedom,  353 — nor  our  accountability,  357. 

Goodness,  not  inconsistent  with  endless  punishment,  119 — for  it  is  just,  134. 
Need  not  make  certain  the  happiness  of  all,  125. 

Gospel,  its  glory  v.hat — a  disjjlay  of  God's  character,  a  provision  for  man,  ii. 
302—308. 

Grace,  whether  it  is  merely  a  means  of  bringing  to  lieaven,  16.  Forgive- 
ness only  through,  ii.  23.  Evidenced  by  its  fruits — so  is  evci-y  grace, 
faith,  love,  humility,  repentance,  gratitude,  hope,  ii.  387  et  seq. 

H. 

Heathen,  salvation  of,  ii.  405. 

Hebrew  language,  its  resemblance  to  the  Mohegan,  in  affixes,  47G.     In  sin- 
gle words,  478. 
Holy  Spirit,  promise  of,  ii.  468 — 71. 
Hopkins  on  the  use  of  means,  489. 
Hume,  some  of  his  opinions  stated,  ii.  169. 

I. 

hnni'tleriality  of  the  sold,  ii.  497 — 502. 

Imputation,  meaning  of  the  term  in  various  connections,  ii.  270. 

Indians,  iMuhhekaneew,  observations  on  their  language,  its  extent,  its  ge- 


552  GENERAL    INDEX. 

nius  grammatically  traced,  some  of  its  peculiarities,  some  instances  of 

analogy  between  it  and  the  Hebrew,  469 — 480. 
Infidelity,  not  necessary  but  voluntary,  ii.  169.     Some  of  its  maxims,  188. 

Its  strongest  point  weakness,  257. 
Infinite  evil  of  sin,  meaning  of  the  phrase,  89.     Consistent  with  degrees  of 

guilt,  90. 

J. 

Justice,  kinds  of,  commutative,  distributive  and  general,  ii.  29.     In  what 

sense  satisfied  by  Christ's  death,  47. 
Justification,  meaning  of  the  term,  ii.  202. 

K. 

King,  the  most  consistent  advocate  of  self-determination,  373.     Holds  that 

motives  have  no  influence,  375. 
Knowledge,  West  on  the  sources  of,  refuted,  405.     Whether  the  gospel  be 

true,  assured  to  all  sincerely  disposed  to  piety,  ii.  163.     Of  the  truth 

necessary  to  true  religion,  212. 


Law,  whether  its  curse  is  the  punishment  necessary  to  lead  to  repentance, 
26 — and  a  means  of  grace,  35 — or  annihilation,  93 — it  is  endless  mise- 
ry, 107.  Not  proved  just  by  the  obedience  and  death  of  Christ,  ii.  38. 
Not  made  void  through  faith,  ii.  361.  Proof,  363 — 9.  But  established, 
369—71. 

lAberality,  modern,  ii.  464. 

Liberty  and  necessity,  dissertation  on,  299 — 468.  West's  definition  com- 
pared with  Clarke's,  313 — his  explanation,  312.  Discussion  of  what 
is  essential  to,  321.  Various  definitions,  326.  Does  not  end  where  ne- 
cessity begins,  340 — or  where  motives  govern,  365.  Consequence  of 
its  being  an  exemption  from  all  extrinsic  influence,  467. 

lAght  of  nature,  proof  of  God's  moral  perfections  from,  ii.  471-496. 

Locke's  proof  that  the  will  is  not  free  to  act  or  not  act,  315. 

M. 

Marriage  of  a  wife's  sister  unlawful,  as  appears  from  scripture  and  reason, 
ii.  125.  Objections,  126-40 — that  the  precept  does  not  literally  forbid, 
127 — that  it  is  ceremonial,  129 — that  a  man  is  no  blood  relation  of 
his  wife's  sister,  131 — that  his  marrying  her  is  not  unlawful, ^er  se,  131 — 
that  it  is  impliedly  permitted,  135,  etc. 

Materiality  of  the  soul,  arguments  in  proof  of  refuted,  ii.  306. 

Merit  of  oondignity  and  congruity,  ii.  49.     Of  virtue,  459 — 64. 

Ministers,  duty  of,  to  be  honest  and  faithful  in  seeking  for  truth,  ii.  64 — in 
preaching  truth,  68 — for  what  reasons,  211.  How  they  may  hold  a  good 
conscience,  157. 

Misery,  endless,  justly  the  curse  of  the  law,  107.  Chauncy's  attempt  to 
prove  the  doctrine  of,  to  be  uncomfortable,  perplexing,  etc.  128. 

Moliegan  language  entirely  difl^erent  from  the  Mohawk,  473.  No  diversity 
of  gender,  474.     No  adjectives,  475. 


GENERAL    INDEX.  553 

Motives,  West's  definition,  342.  An  infallible  connection  between  and  ac- 
tion, 343 — meaninfr  of  this,  344.  Granted  by  West,  345 — his  attempt 
to  j)rove  tliat  mind  acts  witlioiit  a  motive,  348 — his  stricture  on  Presi- 
dent Edwards'  assertion  that  they  may  be  invincible,  354.  Concomitan- 
cy  between  them  and  volitions,  37(i.  Price's  efforts  to  find  a  medium 
between  indiflference  to  them  and  an  inclination  of  the  will,  380.  We 
are  governed  by  them  if  we  give  them  strength  as  much  as  if  we  do 
not,  382. 

Murray,  his  doctrine  of  universalism  examined, — refuted  by  reasoning 
scripture,  and  its  consequences,  279 — 94. 

N. 

JVecessitij,  natural  and  moral  distinguished,  20J).  The  latter  cannot  be  at- 
tended with  as  much  opposition  as  the  former,  301-4.  Or  if  not  the 
love  of  virtue  is  necessitated  by  a  natural  necessity,  304.  The  former 
not  blameworthy,  305.  Strong  epithets  defended,  306.  How  far  both 
necessities  are  the  same,  309-10.  All  events  take  place  in  consequence 
of,  398.  The  logical  necessity  of  West,  411 — who  misrepresents  Pres. 
Edwards,  412.  Dr.  Clarke's  evasion,  413.  Moral  necessity  liable  to  few 
objections  which  may  not  be  urged  against  foreknowledge,  417.  Would 
exist  though  we  were  conscious  of  efficiently  causing  our  volitions,  42.3. 
■whether  we  live  as  if  under  no  moral  necessity,  424.  Whether  it  de- 
stroys agency  and  precludes  action,  425.  Subtlety  of  West  on  act  and 
operativeness,  428.  Moral  necessity  does  not  make  men  machines,  432 — 
nor  place  them  in  respect  to  liberty  on  a  level  with  brutes,  433.  Moral 
necessity  of  sin,  whether  inconsistent  with  God's  holiness,  441 — with 
the  punishment  of  sin,  444 — with  remorse,  449. 

JVewton,  Bishop,  strictures  upon,  203 — G9.  Inconsistent,  264.  Anti-scrip- 
tural, 265. 

JVoTU-resistance,  not  always  a  duty,  ii.  239 — 45. 

O. 

Obligation,  moral,  foundation  of,  ii.  538 — 41. 
Order,  of  gracious  exercises,  ii.  154. 

P. 

Paganism,  some  features  of,  ii,  191. 

Pastors,  duties  of,  ii.  116 — 19.     Addresses  to,  159,  222. 

Perfection,  moral,  not  attainable  in  this  life,  ii.  224 — 7. 

Perfections,  God's  moral,  proof  of,  from  light  of  natm-e,  ii.  471 — 96 — from 

scripture,  505 — 8. 
Persecution,  Christianity  not  answerable  for,  ii.  192.     Practised  by  pagans 

upon  each  other,  193.     Why  no  more  practised,  102. 
Pttitpierre,  his  views  lead  to  false  notions  of  God's  justice  and  grace  and 

forgiveness,  272.     His  notions  as  to  the  happiness  of  every  individual 

and  of  the  universe,  274. 
Power,  not  to  act,  454. 
Preaching,  the  end  of,  is  to  manifest  the  truth,  ii.  62.     Plainly,  engagingly. 


554  GENERAL    INDEX. 

SO  as  to  show  the  heart  and  lead  to  self-exammation, — not  keeping  back 
a  part,  or  using  equivocal  terms,  or  hiunoring  prejudice, — or  neglect- 
ing stLidj',  GO — 2. 
PunishnieiU,  I'litm-e,  whether  adequate  to  the  demerit  of  sin,  and  yet  disci- 
])linary,  23.  Vindictive  in  hell,  because  on  earth,  49.  Scripture  proof,  50. 
Chauncy's  pi-oofs  that  it  is  disciplinary,  68 — 72 — that  endless  punish- 
ment is  unjust,  77.  Future  ])unislinient  not  annihilation,  95 — but  end- 
less misery,  and  tliat  justly,  107.  Proof  from  hopes,  promises,  prayers, 
110.  Good  ends  answered  by,  124.  Of  the  wicked  proved  endless, 
249—60. 

R. 

Refuges  of  lies,  unsafe,  ii.  323 — ignorance,  325 — good  works,  327 — the 
absolute  goodness  and  grace  of  God,  329 — inability,  330. 

Regeneration  distinguished  from  convei'sion,  ii.  110. 

Reid''s  self-contradictions,  369 — 71. 

Religion,  duty  of  professing,  ii.  292.  Encouragement  to  steadfastness  in, 
297.  Philosophical  inferior  to  Christianity,  in  its  teachings  concerning 
the  perfections  and  moral  government  of  God, — the  rule  of  duty,  tlvj 
way  of  pardon,  the  end   of  our  creation,  and   a  future  state,  ii.  200 — 5. 

Relly,  James,  his  treatise  on  union,  269 — 72.  His  notion  that  all  men  are 
one  person  with  Christ. 

Repentance  of  itself  no  ground  of  pardon,  ii.  248.  Cannot  claim  it  from  (a) 
justice,  248 — (b)  or  from  grace,  254 — 7 — for  repentance  neither  fully 
obeys  nor  suffers  the  penalty  of  law,  249 — punishment  has  others  aims 
than  the  good  of  the  offender,  250 — sin  is  a  moral  evil,  251 — law 
must  have  a  sanction,  251. 

Riders,  subniissiou  to,  ii.  238 — as  a  genei'al  rule  a  duty,  240. 


Salvation,  argued  from  the  goodness  of  God,  128 — from  his  end  in  crea- 
tion, 132. 

Sandification,  a  ground  of  comfort,  ii.  228. 

Sandeman,  showed  the  inconsistency  of  popular  preachers,  488. 

Scripture,  language  of,  not  to  be  used  exclusively  in  religious  teaching,  ii. 
213. 

Self-determination,  West  on,  criticised,  318 — 27.  What  it  is,  329 — incon- 
ceivable, 331 — undesirable,  335 — a  mystery,  336 — relieves  no  difficulty, 
337 — j)ossessed  by  God  ?  360 — consequences,  378.  No  proof  of,  from 
our  power  to  suspejid  determination,  420 — nor  from  consciousness,  421 
— as  to  volitions  not  being  the  effect  of  an  extrinsic  cause,  422 — nor  from 
our  own  sense  of  right  and  wrong,  429. 

Self-love,  essay  on,  ii.  544 — 8. 

Shaftesbury,  his  tenets,  ii.  168. 

Shermnn,  Roger,  sketch  of  his  life  and  character,  ii.  180 — 4. 

Sin,  whether  it  is  an  infinite  evil,  78 — 88.  Meaning  of  infinite  evil,  89.  In 
what  sense  God  is  the  author  of,  439.  Why  it  may  appear  the  greatest 
good,  448.  Objections  to  God's  lieing  the  author  of  sin  apply  to  his  be- 
ing the  author  of  calamity,  4.50 — 7. 

Sincerity  in  religion,  of  itself  not  enough,  ii.  180 — 4. 


GENERAL    INDEX.  555 

Sinner,  whether  he  should  thank  God  for  the  sins  he  commits,  450. 
Slavery,  impolitic,  ii.  79 — hurtful  to  morals,  industry,  population,  national 

strengtli,  79 — 81. 
Slave  trade,  unjust  (a)  in  itself,  ii.  7li — (b)  because  cruelly  carried  on,  77 — 

and  (c)  impolitic,  71).     Arguments  in  tiivor  olj  answered,  b'i — 97. 
Soclniitns,  their  objection  that  the  atonement  is  inconsistent  with  grace  in 

pardon,  ii.  ',ki.     Their  principle  that  God  cannot  reluse  pardon   to  any 

penitent  examined,  21 — 3, 
Soul,  [troved   immortal,   ii.  302 — because   immaterial,  303 — from  several 

moral  considerations,  314.     Intermediate  state  of,  5i28 — 33. 
Suffering  may  as  well  be  imposed  lor  the  good  of  a  system,  as  of  the  suf- 

ierer,  59. 


Temptulion,  in  what  sense  God  leads  men  into,  452. 

''Time,  no  independent  existence,  367. 

Trinity,  explanation  of,  ii.  99 — doctrine  of,  profitable  to  be  preached,  101. 

Truth^  all  which  is  divine  may  be  prolitably  preached,  ii.  98 — e.  g.  the  char- 
acter, decrees,  providence  and  law  of  God,  98 — 107.  The  depravity,  re- 
dempiiou,  regeneration  and  accountability  of  man,  lOG — ICJ. 

U. 

Unity,  churches  ought  to  possess — in  articles  of  faith,  aims  and  ends — 

nieasures,  ii.  230. 
Univcrsalism,  its  proof  texts,  281  et  seq. 
Universe,  whether  the  plan  of,  is  the  best  possible,  135. 

V. 

Vice,  why  some  kinds  of,  may  be  more  prevalent  in  christian  than  in  hea- 
then nations,  ii.  191 — 2. 

Virtue,  essence  of|  not  in  being  efficiently  caused  by  the  sulyect,  430. 

Virtues,  moral,  best  promoted  by  Christianity,  e.  g.  temperance,  chastity, 
truth,  justice  and  humanity,  ii.  195 — 200. 

Volitions,  cannot  be  caused  by  the  mind,  339.  Determined  by  motives, 
346.  Always  comparative  acts,  349.  Whether  they  are  efi'ccts,  383. 
If  as  West  holds  they  are  not,  then  no  creature  is  a  creatine,  384 — no 
creature  can  be  the  cause  of  anything,  384.  Objections  to  the  view  of 
volition  as  an  effect,  answered,  385.  Price's  reasoning  refuted,  391. 
West's  concessions,  393 — his  definition  commented  on,  394.  Volition 
as  much  passive  in  his  scheme  as  in  any  other,  397.  Always  moral,  431. 
Clarke's  sophism  on  the  beginning  of  motion,  434. 

W. 

JVay  to  destruction,  in  what  respects,  broad,  ii,  414 — 10. 

JVest,  Dr.  Sanuiel,  remarks  on  his  essays,  299.  Inconsistent,  304,  3^30.  In- 
sists on  the  very  distinction  which  he  reprobates  in  Edwards,  309.  On 
the  power  to  act  or  not  act,  313 — 18.  His  concessions,  338.  His  views 
of  volition  as  not  an  effect,  383.     What  implied  in  his  denying  volition 


556  GENERAL.    INDEX. 

to  result  from  an  extrhisic  cause,  389 — and  nothing  is  thus  |  gained,  392. 

His  quotations  from  Hopkins,  457. 
Will,  Dr.  West  on  its  self-determination,  318. 
Works,  necessary  to  justification  and  pleasing  to  God,  ii.  265. 


END  OF   VOLUME  II, 


Ky 


Date  Due 


4 


HffiTTggr" 


mrs 


m 


